1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR Criminal Application (ABA) No. 269/2011 Sau. Sunanda Ashok Borwal Vs. State of Maharashtra =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mr. S.S. Patil, Adv. for the applicant. Mr. S.S. Doifode, APP for the respondent. CORAM : U.V. BAKRE, J. DATED : 26/08/2011. 1] The applicant, who apprehends her arrest in Daryapur Police Station Crime No.82/2011 registered for offence punishable under Sections 341, 307, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) has filed this application for pre-arrest bail. 2] According to the applicant, she was not present on the spot and has no nexus with the alleged offence and only because she has lodged complaint at Kholapur Police Station against Nandkishore Sudokar and offence was registered under Section 306 of the I.P.C. against him, a false case has been filed against her. 3] By way of reply, the respondent has opposed the application on the ground that there is prima facie evidence against the applicant in the form of eye witness who is the victim of offence and also medical evidence and other circumstantial evidence. 4] Heard arguments. Learned Advocate Shri S.S. Patil argued for the applicant and learned APP Shri 2 S.S. Doifode argued for the State. 5] Advocate Shri Patil for the applicant submits that the applicant is a woman and that the victim has already been discharged from the hospital and no purpose will be served by detaining the applicant in jail. 6] Perusal of the case papers reveal that victim Deepak Thorat has directly involved the applicant by stating that the applicant had lathi with her and she along with two others had assaulted on her head. The injury certificate also reveals that the victim has sustained seven contused lacerated wounds on parietal area and fracture of parietal bone. 7] The co-accused Dnyneshwar has already been arrested and at his instance iron pipe has been recovered and he is still in magisterial custody. Lathi used by the applicant is yet to be recovered. Hence, custodial interrogation of the applicant would be required and the investigation is not yet completed. 8] The applicant is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail. 9] Hence, the application is rejected. JUDGE Ambulikar.