{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3947 OF 2009 Uttam s/o Enka Thelari APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.A.N.Irpatgire, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for the State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 9 th December 2009 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with CR No.145/2009 registered with Nizampur police station for an offence punishable u/s 395, 397, 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 337, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 3 (1) (x) of the Atrocities Act and u/s 37 (1) (3) of the Bombay Police Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP. Also perused the papers of {2} investigation, carried out till today. 3. It appears that the alleged offence is registered on 19th October 2009 on the compliant of one Motiram Patil. It also appears that this incident occurred on the road, where the complainant along with his friend Bhimrao were proceeding on their motorbike towards Nizampur and at about 7.00 p.m. the accused persons stopped them, abused them in the name of their caste and also assaulted them. 4. It is urged that the name of the applicant so also the role played by him, is not disclosed in the FIR, however for the first time, name of the applicant is disclosed when the remand report was sent to JMFC, Sakri on 21 st October 2009. In the premise, it is urged to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. 5. While opposing the application, by placing reliance on the papers of investigation, it is urged by learned APP that the name of the present applicant is disclosed when the statement of the injured witness Bhimrao was recorded during the course of investigation. Said Bhimrao was also admitted in the hospital. Statement of Bhimrao clearly indicates the role played by the applicant. 6. Considering the submissions, it is clear that though the name of the applicant does not figure in the complaint, {3} however, there is allegation in the complaint that Bhimrao was with the applicant at the time of the alleged incident. There is also allegation in the complaint that complainant and Bhimrao were assaulted by the persons, whose names are disclosed in the compliant and by 10 to 15 other persons were also there. In the premise, though the name of the applicant does not figure in the complaint, yet that does not mean that he was not party to the said offence. The statement of Bhimrao indicate that he was treated in the hospital for the injuries sustained by him in the alleged incident. In the premise, there appears prima facie involvement of the applicant in the alleged offence and applicant does not deserve discretion u/s 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 7. In the result, the application, which is sans merits, stands rejected. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/criapln3947-09