1 Cri.A.2605.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2605 OF 2011 1. Ganesh S/o Ramrao Mhaske, 2. Ganesh Asaram Bhujbal, 3. Dnyaneshwar Natha Bhujbal, 4. Mohan Asaram Mhaske, 5. Ram S/o Murlihdar Bhujbal, 6. Anshuram Natha Ghone, 7. Sandeep Asaram Mhaske, 8. Sudhakar Asaram Mhaske, All R/o Akhatwada, Tq. Paithan, District Aurangabad. ...APPLICANTS. VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, and others. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri..N.K.Kakade, Advocate for Applicants. Shri.S.G.Nandedkar, A.P.P. for Respondents. Shri Ujwal Subhash Patil, Advocate for Ori. Complainant. ... CORAM: T.V.NALAWADE, J. DATE : 08TH JULY, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed for anticipatory bail. APP has made available the papers of investigation. Both sides are heard. 2. The Crime No. 43 of 2011 is registered on the basis of report 2 Cri.A.2605.11 given by Suresh Mhaske, with Paithan Police Station, Tq. Paithan, District Aurangabad, for the offence punishable under sections 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 325, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegations are made that on 01.06.011 at 9.30 p.m. present applicants came towards his house and they had given beating, out of previous enmity. He has made allegation that applicants were having weapons sticks, iron bar etc. He has made specific allegation against Mohan Mhaske(Applicant No.4) that he used iron bar against Paraji Mhaske and he caused injury to Paraji Mhaske. It was submitted for the applicants that false allegation is made against applicant No.4 out of political rivallary. Papers of investigation show that Paraji Mhaske sustained two contusions, which were caused by hard and blunt object. CT scan of brain was advised. Allegation made against applicant Ansuram is that he used stick against Jalindhar. He assaulted on head and other parts of body of Jalindhar. Jalindhar sustained as many as five injuries including fracture to tibia. Allegations are made against others like Sandip Mhaske, Sudhakar Mhaske and Dnyaneshwar Bhujbal that they used stick and they assaulted on head, back and hands. Allegations are made that they gave threat that they would finish these injured persons. 3. It was submitted for the applicants that only due to political rivalry and as the applicants are in power allegations are made against them. Copy 3 Cri.A.2605.11 of report given by Government Servant Smt. Jayshree Chitale is produced, it shows occurrence of other alleged incident dated 31.05.2011. She had given report against Dadasaheb Vinyak Mhaske, (2) Jalindhar Tukaram Mhaske. 4. Material collected by the Police make out prima facie case for the offences alleged against the applicants. But against applicant Nos. 1, 2 and 5, no specific role is attributed. In village some persons gather and some persons remain in the vicinity, but they do not take active part in the incident. Therefore, relief can be granted to applicant Nos. 1 , 2 and 5. Already ad-interim relief is given to these applicants and so that relief is confirmed by allowing their application. Application in respect of other applicants stands rejected. Sd/- [ T.V.NALAWADE, J.] MTK 4 Cri.A.2605.11