1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 689/2009 (Arunkumar Kashiram Jadhav vs. State of Maharashtra) & CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 690/2009 (Tukaram Ramchandra Dhondge vs. State of Maharashtra) Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order Mr A. S. Mardikar, Adv.for applicant/s Mr Anup Parihar ,APP for Respondent C ORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 23rd September, 2009. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants. At the interim stage on 27th August, 2009, conditional interim anticipatory bail was granted. The learned APP was directed to take instructions and file reply. Accordingly, an affidavit of Police Sub Inspector, Ramdaspeth Police Station, Akola is filed on 14.9.2009. With reference to the affidavit, it is contended by learned APP that regarding misappropriation of public money, custodial interrogation is required. 2. Learned Advocate for the applicants filed counter-affidavit of Tukaram Ramchandra Dhondge in order to bring to the notice of this Court that Police Inspector, Ramdaspeth Police Station, Akola had already interrogated the applicant on 10.9.2009 during the period between 11.10 a.m. and 2030 hours and on 11.9.2009 between 9.30 am and 1800 hours. It was specifically informed to the applicants that if they are required for further interrogation, the same would be informed on their phone numbers, which were given to the Investigating Officer and, at that time they may remain present. The applicants are ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation at any time when I.O. may inform and require them to attend the 2 I.O. for the purpose of interrogation. For this reason I am inclined to confirm the interim anticipatory bail granted at the interim stage. 3. Interim anticipatory bail is confirmed, subject to same conditions. Both Applications 689 and 690 both of 2009 are disposed of. JUDGE. sahare