(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Criminal Application No. 3688 of 2011 Santosh s/o. Shravan Bhingare, Aged : 41 years, Occupation : Business, R/o. Pahadsingpura, Begumpura, Aurangabad. .. Applicant. versus The State of Maharashtra. .. Respondent. ....................... Mr. H.M. Salve, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr. D.R. Korde, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent. ........................ CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 13TH SEPTEMBER 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Perused the investigation papers which were made available for inspection purpose, and heard learned respective (2) Counsel for the parties, finally. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant, namely, Santosh s/o. Shravan Bhingare, seeking anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. I-82/2011, registered at Begumpura Police Station, Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 323, 324, 504, 506, 146, 147, 148 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, and under Sections 4 and 25 of Indian Arms Act. 3. It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by one Prashant s/o. Arun Zare, on 6-6-2011, in respect of occurrence of the incident at about 7.15 p.m. on the same day, reflecting name of the applicant herein and attributing specific role to him in the occurrence of the incident, that the applicant herein gave blow of sword on the head of the said complainant and caused serious bleeding injury, along with other co-accused persons. Moreover, the injury certificate of the complainant discloses that he sustained injury on temporal region, 3 X 0.5 cm., and injury on left side parietal region, 3 X 0.5 cm., and the said situs of injuries is the vital part of the body. So also, said injuries were caused by the applicant by dangerous weapon like sword. (3) 4. Besides, there is eye witness, namely, Sunil More, to the occurrence of the incident, whose statement has been recorded during the course of investigation, which is in consonance with the complaint lodged by the first informant. 5. Having comprehensive view of the matter, and considering accusations made against the applicant, and the nature and gravity thereof, apparently, there is no possibility of false implication of the applicant and custodial interrogation of the applicant is inevitable and imperative for further progress in the investigation in proper manner, and hence, present Application deserves to be rejected. 6. In the result, present Criminal Application which is sans merits, stands dismissed, and is disposed of finally. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/ka3688