1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.25 OF 2011 1 Ramesh @ Bala Kaluram Gaikwad 2 Mr. Jayvant Vaman Pawar ...Applicants. v. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondents. Mr. M.A. Noorani , adv. For the Applicants. Smt.G.P.Mulekar, APP For the Respondent/State. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 4, 2011. P.C. 1 Applicants seek to be released on bail in crime no.198 of 2009 registered at Wada police station, District: Thane for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 336, 452 and 504 of the I.P.C. 2 As per the report lodged by Smt. Usha Narayan Chaudhary on 6.11.2009 at about 8 p.m., 7-8 persons came in front of the house and gave a call to her son Jayesh. She told that Jayesh was not present. They initially introduced themselves as friends of Jayesh. However, two of them entered into her house following the complainant Usha Chaudhary and threatened to kill her if she would shout. They started damaging property in the house. Chairs in the house were broken by them. They broke open cupboard and took out an amount of Rs.5,000/-. One of the two accused persons snatched gold chain and mangalsutra from the neck 2 of Usha Chaudhary. Their companions standing outside the house were pelting stones on the house. At that time, police van came there, therefore, the culprits started running away. Out of them one was Sandesh Patil. With the help of police and local people, present two applicants were arrested and they disclosed the names of their companions also. According to the prosecution, an amount of Rs.5,000/- was found with the applicant no.2 Jaywant. Chain and mangalsutra were found with the applicant no.1 Ramesh and the articles were seized on the spot. 3 The learned counsel for the applicants contends that main target of this case was Sandesh Patil, who was working as deputy chief editor of the local newspaper Mashal. He wanted to start a new business of supplying construction material and this was not liked by the family of the complainant because they were established in that business and they had de facto monopoly of that business in the town and, therefore, false case was lodged by them. Sandesh Patil has been granted bail. Remaining accused persons were also granted bail as there was no recovery from them. The learned counsel points out that Sandesh Patil resides just opposite to the house of the complainant. Other accused persons are also from same town. He also contends that certain facts 3 mentioned in the F.I.R. would not indicate the intention of the applicants to commit dacoity or theft. If they wanted to commit dacoity, they would not pelt stones on the house from the outside and would not break the chairs in the house. This conduct does not show that they were interested in committing theft or dacoity. According the learned counsel for the applicants, the whole complaint is false and to stop Sandesh Patil from entering into business, he and his friends have been falsely implicated in this case. It is not necessary to comment about the said contentions. Investigation is already completed and charge-sheet is also filed. It is admitted by the prosecution that the applicants have no criminal antecedents. 4 Therefore, applicants be released on their executing PR of Rs.10,000/- each with surety in the like amount with condition that they shall report at the police station on 1st Sunday of every month till the end of the trial. Application stands disposed off. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)