1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4397 OF 2009 Nandkishor @ Babanrao S/o. Narsingrao Shinde (Hande) Age-45 years, Occu-Agriculture and Social Work, R/o.Dhalegaon, Tal.Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Officer, Kingaon Police Station, Tal.Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur RESPONDENT Mr.N.B.Suryawanshi, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for respondent State. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 08/01/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on regular bail in connection with CR No. 64/2009 under section 395, 143, 147, 148, 149, 354, 323, 341 and 506 of IPC. This application is moved after completion of investigation. Charge sheet is filed in the Court of J.M.F.C. Ahmednagar on 30/11/2009. 2 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for State. Also perused the papers of investigation as the charge sheet is already filed. 3. Before considering the submissions across the bar, one fact required consideration is that the alleged incident took place on 30/08/2009 on the basis of complaint of Advocate Bipinchandra Gundare. This offence came to be registered against the present applicant and others. Earlier the applicant has applied for anticipatory bail which came to be rejected by my order dated 16/11/2009. Thereafter, the applicant either surrendered or came to be arrested on 18/11/2009 and since then is in custody. Considering the submissions across the bar advanced from both the sides in support of their rival contentions as well as the statement of witnesses recorded during the investigation, it appears that these statements are two fold. One group of witnesses is supporting to the complainant while another group of witnesses is supporting the stand taken by the present applicant as urged across the bar. These set of witnesses supporting the stand taken by the applicant includes two police officials who were present on the spot. But this is not the stage to investigate in the matter whether the group of witnesses supporting the complainant are telling truth or the group of witnesses supporting the applicant are telling truth, but the fact remains that as the investigation is over and there are two set of witnesses, then there is lis chance of tampering of witnesses of prosecution. The applicant is the permanent r/o. of village 3 Dhalegaon, which is at the distance of 65 kms. away from Latur i.e. the place of residence of complainant advocate. 4. In the premise, now the case is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail. Hence following order : O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. Applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. 3. After released on bail, the applicant not to leave the local jurisdiction of Kingaon Police Station without prior permission in writing from the concerned Investigation Officer in CR No.64/2009. 4. Applicant not to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. 5. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JAN 2010/cri.appl.4397-09