[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLN.NO.2575 OF 2008 Shri.Bhagwan Babu Chavan and Anr. ..Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent ... Mr.V.V.Gangurde Advocate for Applicants Mr.S.S.Pednekar APP for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : JULY 31, 2008 DATE : JULY 31, 2008 DATE : JULY 31, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the applicants and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in CR No.I-39 of 2008 of Ganeshpuri Police Station. The said case is mainly under Section 326 of IPC. 3. FIR mentions the names of the applicants. The material on record shows that the applicant no.1 was armed with a sickle and applicant no.2 was armed with a stick. Applicant no.1 gave blow with sickle on the hand of the complainant. At that [-2-] time, applicant no.2 beat complainant on her chest, stomach and neck. The complainant sustained injuries in the incident and she had to be admitted in the hospital. 4. The learned advocate for the applicants states that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case because applicant no.2 had filed a FIR on 18.1.2007 involving the complainant’s side. A private complaint was also filed against the present complainant and spouse of the complainant under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Merely because the applicants had filed complaints against the present complainant and other witnesses, it cannot be said that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The material on record clearly implicates the applicant, hence, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 5. Application is rejected. Time is granted to the applicants till 5.8.2008 to surrender. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]