1 Cr. Appln. no. 4140.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4140 OF 2009 Sattar Abdul Pathan Age 49 years Occupation Business R/o Ramchandra Khunth Shah Daval Dargah,Ahemdnagar ... Applicant V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra Copy served on Public Prosecutor High Court Bench At Aurangabad. ... Respondent ... Mr. Vijay Sharma,Advocate for Applicant. Mr. B.J.Sonwane, A.P.P. for respondent-State. ... CORAM : A.V. POTDAR, J. DATED : 11TH DECEMBER, 2009 PER COURT : 1] By the present application, the applicant approached this Court for his releasing on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest, in connection with Crime No. 220 of 2009 registered with Tophkhana Police Station, Ahmednagar, District Ahmednagar, for the offence punishable under sections 307, 326 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 4 read 2 Cr. Appln. no. 4140.09 with section 25 of the Arms Act. 2] Heard learned Counsel appearing for the applicant followed by submissions of learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the respondent- State. On the last occasion directions were given to the learned A.P.P. to produce before this Court the investigation papers relating to Crime No.219 of 2009 and 220 of 2009, as there are counter complaints filed by the applicant as well as complainant in that Crime against each other. 3] Perused the investigation papers which are produced before me, shows that the present applicant has lodged complaint against the complainant and three others, who has lodged the complaint, on which basis Crime No.220 of 2009 came to be registered in Tophkhana Police Station. The complaint lodged by the present applicant against the complainant and others in that crime was reported in Police station at 10.30 a.m., about the incident which took place near about same time. Then offence came to be registered under section 307,326 read with 34 of the Indian 3 Cr. Appln. no. 4140.09 Penal Code against the complainant in Crime No. 220 of 2009 and his associates. But, further, it appears that offence came to be registered on which the applicant has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail was reported in the Police Station around 3.00 p.m. the time of the alleged incident as recorded in the Police Station at 11.00 a.m. considering these facts, it requires to be considered whether learned counsel appearing for the applicant is right in his submission that to give counter blast to the complaint lodged by him, false and incorrect complaint was lodged against the present applicant by the persons against whom he has lodged the complaint. The allegation in the complaint, lodged against the present applicant is that present applicant has assaulted the complainant by chopper in his hand on his head, while his associates assaulted associates of applicant with tommy as well as iron rod,wooden rod,with which they sustained injuries. 4] It is to be noted that after the complaint was lodged by the present applicant, he was 4 Cr. Appln. no. 4140.09 referred for medical treatment to District Government Hospital at around 11.35 a.m. The certificate of that medical examination is on record. As against this, the certificate as regards examination of complainant in Crime No.220 of 2009 is also produced today along with papers of investigation. It shows that, Dilawar Shaikh and his two associates were examined in the District Hospital at Ahmednagar around 12.00 noon. That means they were examined in the hospital before Crime No.220 of 2009 was registered. On clear perusal of these papers of medical examination of the complainant in Crime No.219 of 2009 and his associates that they were referred to medical examination along with Police yadi. After their examination, near about, after three hours compliant came to be lodged against the present applicant and others. When there is allegation against the present applicant that he used the chopper, which is a sharp cutting instrument used by a butcher, the description as specified by the complainant does not match with the allegations made by the complainant. If it is so even though 5 Cr. Appln. no. 4140.09 it is urged and opposed by the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the prosecution that yet a chopper is to be recovered and whether edge of it is sharp or blunt whether use of such weapon can be possible and can not possible will be determined. 5] Considering these submissions across the bar, on the face, it appears that the complaint lodged, in which anticipatory bail is asked and prayed for by the present applicant, is lodged after he has lodged the complaint against the complainant therein. Apart from it, the medical certificate on record clearly indicates that after admission of the present applicant in the hospital he remained in the Hospital and was treated as indoor patient for five days. As against this, the complainant in crime No.220 of 2009 and his associates were discharged from the hospital against medical advice and consultation on the same day, which goes to show that case is made out to exercise the discretion under section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Hence, application 6 Cr. Appln. no. 4140.09 deserves following order. ORDER 1] Application is allowed. 2] The applicant be released on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 220 of 2009 on furnishing surety of in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the sum of like amount. 3] After releasing on bail, the applicant to give attendance to Tophkhana Police Station, whenever required on the written requisition of the concerned Investigation Officer in Crime No. 220 of 2009. 4] Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V. POTDAR, J.) MTK/