1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.138/2011 (Rahul Shivram Helode .vrs. State of Maharashtra) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. S.V. Sirpurkar, Advocate for applicant, Mr. S.B. Ahirkar, APP for respondent. .......... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J DATED : APRIL 30, 2011 Heard. By order dated 15.4.2011, an ad-interim direction in terms of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. was passed in favour of the applicant with regard to arrest apprehended by him in connection with Crime No. 45/2011 for offences under sections 363, 147, 306, 504, 323, 506 of IPC registered on 12.4.2011 with Police Station, Khamgaon, District-Buldhana. The notice of the said application was served upon the prosecution and in pursuance to the same the prosecution has filed the say. After considering the matters stated in the say, the nature of accusation levelled and the fact of the applicant having taken the deceased to the hospital after he attempted to commit suicide by consuming poison, the Scooty of applicant being seized during the 2 course of investigation, it is difficult to perceive of any case being made out of custodial interrogation of the applicant being necessary for the purpose of completion of investigation. The learned APP tried to canvass that the sale deed entered in between the deceased and the applicant is yet to be taken charge, thereon the learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant will cooperate investigating officer and will produce the copies of the documents which are in his possession. Having regard to the said statement and so also the grievance made by the learned APP that the applicant has not attended the investigating officer but no such direction was given by the Bench who has given earlier order, it appears that the ends of justice would be served by confirming interim protection with certain modification. The same appears accordingly after considering the case of the applicant in the light of the guidelines given by the Apex Court in para no. 122 to 125 in decision in the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre .vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. reported in 2010 (12) SCALE 691 regarding such matters. Inform I.O. of the said crime that in event of arrest of applicant in connection with the said crime, he be released on bail upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two separate solvent sureties in the like amount and subject to the conditions that the applicant : (i) shall attend said Police Station in connection with the investigation of the said crime on every day in between 11 am and 2 pm, until further order, 3 (ii) shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation levelled against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Police Officer; (iii) shall stay at the address mentioned in the application and shall not change the same without permission of the Court; (iv) shall not commit any offence while being on bail granted vide this order. The application stands disposed of. JUDGE Gulande