1512appln1928.10.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1928 of 2010. (Ganesh Janardan Khond ..vs.. The State of Mah. through P.S.O. P.S.Tamgaon.) ............................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................... Mr.A,J.Thakkar, Adv. for the applicant. Mrs.A.R.Taywade,APP for the State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J. DATED : 15 th December, 2010. The applicant by the present application seeking pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Mr.Thakkar, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the applicant is an innocent person. There was communal riot in the village and the applicant is falsely involved in the said offence. Learned counsel further submits that prior to present Crime No.115 of 2010 lodged with the Police station, there were already two incidents reported to the Police station and Crime Nos.113 and 114 of 2010 were already registered at the police in respect of fight between the two groups of the two communities. Mr.Thakkar, learned counsel, submits that even bare perusal of the report would show that the vague allegations are made in the report. In view of the said material, learned counsel submits that the applicant may not be required for any custodial interrogation and as such deserves to be protected at the hands of the court. Learned Additional Public prosecutor has strongly opposed the application. Learned APP has filed reply and 1512appln1928.10.odt 2 made available the material collected by the Investigating Agency. Learned APP further submits that offence is serious. He submits that on receiving the information that there is communal riot in the village, the police personnel immediately rushed to the spot to control the situation. Learned APP further submits that when the police personnel reached on the spot, the mob including the applicant and other accused started pelting stone on the police vehicle. The police vehicle was damaged. The police personnel reached on the spot to control the situation were subjected to the assault by sticks, axes and stones. Members of the police party were injured and atmosphere of threat was created on the spot by the members of the assembly. He further submits that the intention of the assembly was clear to cause disturbance in the discharge of the duties of the police officials. Learned APP invited my attention to the statements of the witnesses wherein it is clearly reflected that the applicant along with the other accused actually participated in the assault on the police personnel. There is enough material to connect the applicant with the crime. The nature of the offence is serious where the law enforcing agency was subjected to assault and the vehicle was damaged. In my opinion, this is not the fit case to grant protection to the applicant. In the result, the application is rejected. JUDGE chute