abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4058 OF 2007 1. Somnath Shankar Nagare 2. Shivaji Mahadu Nagare 3. Master Bhausaheb Shivaji Nagare 4. Master Jagan Chhabu Nagare .. Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.Abhaykumar Apte i/b Mr.S.M. Sabrad for the applicant. Mr.D.P. Adsule, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 24TH JANUARY 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and A.P.P. for the State. 2. By this application, the applicants seek pre-arrest bail under section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in respect of the offence registered with Lasalgaon Police Station, Nashik under C.R. No.106/2007 punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 504 and 506 of - 2 - the Indian Penal Code. 3. There is a dispute between the complainant party and the present applicants regarding land. On 23rd November 2007, two cross complaints have been lodged, one by the complainant party and another by the applicants party against each other. Copies of both the cross complaints are annexed to the application. It appears that injuries have been caused to the persons from both the parties. The members of the complainant party and the members of the applicants party applied separately for pre-arrest bail before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge at Niphad. Learned counsel for the applicants states that all the members of the complainant party have been granted pre-arrest bail. So far as the members of the applicants party are concerned, vide order dated 11th December 2007 passed in Criminal Application No.227 of 2007, four persons were granted bail while the pre-arrest bail has been rejected to the present applicants. 4. I have perused the order dated 11th December 2007. It does not disclose existence of any difference between the alleged role played by the persons to whom bail has been granted and the persons to whom the bail has been refused. No specific reasons have been given for refusing bail to the present applicants. - 3 - 5. Since all persons of the complainant party have been granted bail and some of the members of the applicants’ party have also been granted bail and no specific reasons have been given for rejection of bail to the present applicants, on the ground of parity the applicants are also entitled to pre-arrest bail. Hence, I pass the following order:- ORDER ORDER ORDER In the event of the arrest of any of the applicants in connection with the offence mentioned above, each of them shall be released on bail on executing personal bond of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15,000/- subject to the following conditions:- (a) The applicants shall not make any inducement nor give any threats to any of the prosecution witnesses and shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence. (b) The applicants shall cooperate with the investigation and attend the concerned police station as and when summoned for interrogation by the police. (c) This order shall come to an end on the charge - 4 - sheet being filed whereupon the applicants shall be entitled to apply for regular bail before the regular court. If such application is made, it shall be considered on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations made in this order. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)