1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1127 OF 2010 Dilip Vitthal Karale and ors. ..Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra and others. ..Respondent. ..... Mr.A.S. More, Advocate for applicants. Mr.D.V. Tele, APP for respondents. ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE,J DATE : 7th April, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr.A.S. More, learned counsel for applicants and Mr.D.V. Tele, learned A.P.P. for respondents. 2. This is an application preferred by applicant nos. 1 to 5 seeking anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection with C.R. No.10/2010, registered with Paranda Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 324, 427 of Indian Penal Code. 3. It appears that offence has been registered on the basis of the report lodged by one Pandit Karale on 2 31st January, 2010 in respect of occurrence of incident on the same day. It is seen from the contents of the said complaint that the names of applicant nos. 1 to 5 have been reflected therein and specific role and overt act has been attributed to them during the occurrence of incident such as applicant no.1-Dilip, applicant no.2-Sushil, applicant no.3-Vitthal, applicant no.4-Suresh, applicant no.5-Devidas and other co-accused persons arrived on the spot of incident, and abused and threatened Arun Karale and applicant no.1-Dilip was armed with sickle and he gave blow on the head of victim Arun and also gave fist blow and banged him as well as applicant no.2-Sushil and applicant no.3-Vitthal assaulted another victim Mahadeo Karale by stone and handle of Tikav and thereby said victim also was injured as well as applicant no.4-Suresh assaulted third victim Maloji by stick and iron rod after throwing chili powder in the eyes as well as applicant no.5-Devidas assaulted victim Arun Karale by handle of Tikav and stick and thereby he also was injured. 4. It was pointed out that applicants are absconding 3 and not made themselves available for investigation as well as above referred weapons are yet to be recovered, and therefore, it is submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicants is necessary. 5. Considering the contents of F.I.R. and specific role attributed to applicants, apparently, there is no question of false implication of applicants. Hence, I am of the view that custodial interrogation of applicants is necessary for further progress in the investigation in proper perspective, and therefore, there appears no substance in application and application being devoid of any merit deserves to be dismissed. 6. Hence, the present application being sans merit, stands dismissed. 7. The above observations are prima facie observations and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE) JUDGE gas/cri1127.10