1 mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 824 of 2010 Mahendra Bajarang Shinde & ors. ... Applicants versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ... Mr.V.V. Mohite for the applicant. Mr.A.S. Gadkari APP for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATED : 26th February 2010 P.C. 1. Heard. 2. By this application, applicants seek bail in connection with C.R. No.23 of 2010 registered at Vadgaon Police Station, District Kolhapur for an offence punishable u/s.143, 147, 148, 149, 326, 323, 336, 427 and 504 of the IPC r/w section 25 of the Arms Act. 3. According to the prosecution, on account of an enmity arising out of elections to the Gram Panchayat, the applicants, 25 in number, forcibly entered the house of Iqbal Haji Mohd Shaikh, father of the complainant and assaulted them with sword, iron bars and wooden 2 sticks. Two blows by sword were inflicted on the head of the father of the complainant by the applicant no.2. Other applicants inflicted blows to the complainant as well as his father and other family members by iron bars and wooden sticks. Applicant no.1 was wielding a fire arms (pistol) in his hand. However, there is no allegation of firing of any round. The complainant, his father and other relatives were admitted to the hospital. The injury certificate of the father of the complainant shows two large contused lacerates wounds on his head. 4. All the 25 assailants have been named in the complaint. Possibility of an inaccurate inclusion of some of the applicants cannot be ruled out. In any event apart from applicant no.1 who was wielding a pistol and applicant no.2 who inflicted the blows with the sword, the other applicants are alleged to have been wielding iron bars and wooden sticks. Who was wielding iron bars and who was wielding wooden sticks has not been specified. 5. Applicants were arrested on 8th February 2010 and were in police custody till 12th February 2010 and since then are in magisterial custody. Taking into consideration the fact that applicant nos.3 to 25 were not alleged to be carrying dangerous weapon like the pistol or the sword, in my view, they can be granted bail. So far as applicant nos.1 and 2 are concerned, they were carrying dangerous weapons. Applicant no.2 actually inflicted the sword blows. Therefore, their case can be differentiated from the rest of the applicants. Applicant nos.1 and 2 therefore cannot be granted bail at this stage. Hence, I pass the following order:- 3 O R D E R Applicant nos.3 to 25 be released on bail on their executing P.R bond of Rs.20,000/- each with one surety each for the like amount subject to the following conditions:- i) Applicants shall not threaten any of the prosecution witnesses. ii) Applicants, shall within 48 hours of their release, inform in writing to the concerned police station their present residential address as well as their telephone/mobile numbers and intimate any change within 48 hours of the change. iii)They shall co-operate with the investigation and shall attend the concerned police station as and when specifically summoned. Application for bail of applicant nos.1 and 2 is rejected. They are however free to apply again after the investigation is complete. (D.G. KARNIK,J.)