{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2730 OF 2010 Dwarkadas Uttamrao Davkar & others APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr. V.D.Salunke, Advocate for the applicants Mr. S.G.Nandedkar, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 12th August 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present criminal application, all the four applicants have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.46/2010 registered with Pimpalner police station, Dist-Beed. 2. As interim protection was granted to the applicants by the lower court, the applicants are protected by way of interim order dated 28.07.2010 passed by this Court. 3. Today, when application came up for final hearing, {2} heard learned counsel for the applicants followed by learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation. 4. This offence is registered on the complaint of one Narayan in respect of an incident dated 19th May 2010. It is alleged that on the day of the incident, in the morning fracas has taken place between one Balwant and Thapade and due to the said incident, in the evening, when the complainant along with his friend was taking tea, all the applicants along with 10 to 15 persons came at the spot, near a bus stand, and first applicant took out a revolver and opened fire in the air. It is further alleged that all the persons along with the applicants were holding deadly weapons in their hands. It is alleged that applicant No.2 was holding sword and assaulted the complainant on his wrist. It appears that in the said assault the complainant and one Bandu were seriously injured and hence they were medically treated. 5. It is urged by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant No.1 has surrendered the revolver and licence before the investigating officer. The only allegation against the first applicant is that he has just opened fire in the air. There are direct allegations against applicant No.2, however there are sweeping allegations against applicant Nos.3 and 4. According to learned counsel for the applicants, the liberty granted to the applicants is not misused by them and they have cooperated the investigating agency and hence it is requested to confirm the interim protection. {3} 6. While opposing the bail application, learned APP has urged that considering the scenario at the spot of incident it is clear that the applicants have tried to create terror in the minds of the people in a public place. It is also urged that there are criminal antecedents to the credit of the first applicant and hence urged to reject the bail application. 7. Considering the rival submissions, it is clear that the applicants and other accused came at the spot and from the way and manner in which the fire was opened, it can safely be gathered that it was nothing but an attempt of the accused to create terror in the minds of the people present at the spot. Moreover, specific role is attributed to applicant No.2 that he was holding sword and has assaulted the complainant on his wrist. However, so far as applicants No.3 and 4 are concerned, there are sweeping allegations against them and no overtact to the effect that as to whether they were holding any weapon or assaulted any one is attributed to them. In the premise, the application deserves to be partly allowed. 8. Accordingly, the application is partly allowed. The application so far as it relates to applicants No.1 and 2 is hereby rejected. However, the application so far as it relates to applicants No.3 and 4 is allowed. Interim protection granted to applicants No. 3 and 4 is hereby confirmed and to remain in force till filing of the {4} charge sheet. The applicants are directed to attend the concerned police station as and when required for investigation by the IO on written intimation well in advance. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2730-10