1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2426 OF 2010 Hanumant S/o.Bhimrao Kendre, and another APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.N.N.Chitlange, learned counsel for applicants. Mr.K.S.Patil , learned APP for State CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 20/07/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants are before this Court for their release on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.101/2010, registered in kandhar Police Station, for the offence punishable u/s. 452, 394, 294 r/w. 34 of IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned APP for State. Perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. It appears that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of one Renukabai on 04/06/2010, around 3.00 p.m. Perusal of the complaint demonstrates that in the evening of 2 02/06/2010, some people were discussing about the misuse of tin sheets of the Maruti Temple by the first applicant. Thereafter those people, who are gossiping at the public place, were fled away from that place. There are allegations that, in the evening, these applicants reached at the residence of complainant and abused her in filthy language. She was assaulted by the first applicant with an axe while the 2nd applicant snatched the golden ornaments on her person. She was taken to the hospital by her husband, where after initial treatment, she was referred for further treatment to the Government Medical College, Nanded, where she was treated and was discharged on 03/06/2010 around 6.30 p.m., and thereafter the complaint came to be lodged against these applicants. 4. It is tried to urge across the bar that the husband of the complainant is one of the accused in the offence, which complaint was lodged in the month of Nov. 2009 and and as now the said case came up for hearing, by way of pressurized tactics, the applicants are falsely roped in the present CR. It was also urged that even though the alleged incident occurred in the evening of 02/06/2010, the FIR was lodged on 04/06/2010 on 6.30 p.m. According to the counsel, as the threats were given by the complainant in this CR, an application was moved before the Dy.S.P. about the threats given by the complainant that she has sustained injuries due to the assault by her husband, but she will lodge the complaint about the said assault against these applicants. 3 5. To consider the fact whether there is any delay in lodging the FIR or not, papers of medical examination of the complainant speaks alot. It appears that initially the complainant was treated in the Rural Hospital at Kandhar on 02/06/2010, from where she was referred to the Government Medical College, Nanded. In the Govt.Medical College, Nanded, she was treated on 03/06/2010. After the scanning, she was discharged in the evening, then she came to Kandhar and lodged complaint. 6. In this scenario, it can not be said that the complaint is delayed and after thought. The fact remains that due to the previous acquaintance as demonstrated across the bar, the applicant and complainant are known to each other, in the premise, there can not be a mistaken identity. Considering the overall view, this is not a case of false implication. Application is sans any merit, hence rejected. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JULY 2010/cri-appl-2426-10