( 1 ) cria4980.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4980 OF 2011 1. Rajendra s/o. Sakharam Pathare .. Applicants Age. 31 years, Occ. Business, 2. Ganesh s/o. Vitthal Jejurkar Age. 24 years, Occ. Business, 3. Mangesh s/o. Bharat Jadhav Age. 22 years, Occ. Labourer, All R/o. Rahata, Taluka Rahata, Dist. Ahmednagar. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents Mr. S.B. Talekar, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. K.S. Patil, A.P.P. for respondent/State. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 07.12.2011 P.C. :- 1. Heard learned advocates on both sides. All three applicants apprehend arrest in Crime No. I-232 of 2011, registered with Shirdi Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar. The victim - Shivaji Pawar was subjected to violence firstly on 20th October, 2011, late in the night ( 2 ) cria4980.11 in the nature of giving slaps. On the next day i.e. on 21st October, 2011 between 9.00 p.m. to 2 a.m. said victim Shivaji pawar was detained in a hotel premises and thereafter at about 2.00 a.m. he was taken out and he was robbed of Rs. 22,310/- at the hands of present applicants. Applicant No.2 Ganesh was also party to said incident. Balu Yamaji Misal is the eye-witness to the incident of carrying the victim to secluded place on motor-cycle. No specific role is attributed to applicant No.3 – Mangesh Patil. According to the applicants since applicant No.1 is contesting election, this false F.I.R. has been filed. 2. I have considered the submissions. Looking to the text of F.I.R. and other police papers, applicant No. 3 – Mangesh, against whom there is no material, can be granted anticipatory bail. 3. So far as applicant No.1 – Rajendra and ( 3 ) cria4980.11 applicant No.2 - Ganesh are concerned, there is material as discussed above. Therefore, police have to be given free hand to carry out investigation. I do not agree with the submissions advanced by learned advocate for the applicants that this F.I.R. has been filed by way of false case solely to create interference in the candidature of present applicant No. 1 - Rajendra. 4. In my opinion, this is not the case where Court should exercise discretion in favour of applicant Nos. 1 & 2, to grant anticipatory bail. It is true that the F.I.R. has been filed on 23rd October, 2011 i.e. 2 days after the incident of carrying victim Pawar in the hotel premises. However, that delay would not fatal to the prosecution case. Hence, the application for anticipatory bail filed by applicant Nos.1 & 2 is rejected. 5. Anticipatory bail is granted to applicant No.3- Mangesh. In the event of arrest of applicnat No. 3 – ( 4 ) cria4980.11 Mangesh, in Crime No. I-232 of 2011 registered with Shirdi Police Station, he be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with one surety in like amount. He shall execute P.R. bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand). He shall report to the concerned police station firstly on 13th December, 2011 and thereafter as and when called. 6. Applicant No.1-Rajendra was granted interim protection by virtue of order dated 21.11.2011. At the request of learned advocate for the applicants, said protection granted to applicant No.1-Rajendra is continued till 13th December, 2011. Learned advocate for applicants states upon instructions that applicant No.1- Rajendra shall surrender before concerned the J.M.F.C. at Rahata before 5.00 p.m. of 13th December, 2011. [R.Y. GANOO, J.] snk/2011/DEC11/cria4980.11