IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1461/2009 (Keshao Niwlaji More & another ..vs.. State ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CORAM : S.R.DONGAONKAR, J. DATE : 11 th JUNE, 2009 Heard Shri De, advocate for applicant and Shri Thakre APP for state. This is an application under section 438 of Cr.P.C.for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicants are apprehending arrest for the offences under sections 143, 147, 149, 323, 504, 395, r/w 34 of I.P.C. Registered by P.S.O. Daryapur. Learned APP has pointe dout that there are eye witnesses to the incident who are noneless than the advocates namely Suman Chakre, Rajendra Gomase and Vijay Kolhe. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that Vijay Kolhe is counsel for the complainant and other advocates who are mentioned by the learned APP to be eye witnesses to the incident, are his juniors. Though this fact may be there, it can not be presumed that advocates would state false in favour of the client to make out a criminal case against applicant. That may be a fact to be ascertained by the trial court. If such things happened the alleged eye witnesses may also face consequences. For this reason, it is difficult to grant anticipatory bail. Application is rejected. However, applicants are at liberty to move for appropriate relief before the trial Court. Application stands disposed of. JUDGE smp