1 crap4191.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4191 OF 2011 1 Namdeo Murlidhar Jadhav, age 50 years, occ. Service, r/o Pathardi Town, Taluka Pathardi, District Ahmednagar, 2 Ketan s/o Deelip Jadhav, age 21 years, occ. Agril., r/o Pathardi Town, Taluka Pathardi, District Ahmednagar ...Applicants [Orig. Accused Nos. 1 & 9 in F.I.R.] VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, 2 The Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar 3 The Police Station Incharge, Pathardi Police Station, Taluka Pathardi, District Ahmednagar ...Respondents ..... Shri N.K.Kakade, advocate for applicants Shri D.R.Korde, A.P.P. for respondents ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 12th October, 2011 2 crap4191.11 PER COURT : 1 Perused the investigation papers which were made available for inspection purpose, as well as heard respective learned counsel for the parties finally. 2 This is an application preferred by applicant nos. 1 and 2, seeking anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest under CR No.I-295 of 2011, registered at Pathardi police station, District Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 436, 324, 143, 147, 148, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the complainant, namely Bhimraj Namdeo Zarekar on 20.7.2011 against the applicants and other co-accused persons. 4 It appears from the contents of the complaint that although the name of applicant no.1, namely Namdeo Murlidhar Jadhav has been reflected in the contents of the said complaint, and although it is stated therein that he assaulted the 3 crap4191.11 complainant by stick, it is nowhere stated in the complaint that the said applicant no.1 assaulted on which part of the body of the complainant, and besides that, there appears to be general and omnibus allegations against applicant no.1. 5 On perusal of the injury certificate of the complainant, namely Bhimraj, it appears that he sustained two injuries on fore head and two injuries on his hand, but those all injuries are simple injuries and it is reported that he has been discharged from the hospital. 6 As regards the allegations against applicant no.2, namely Ketan Deelip Jadhav, it appears that he has been referred in the complaint as son of applicant no.1, namely Namdeo Murlidhar Jadhav and his specific name has not been surfaced in the first information report and even no overt act/specific role has been attributed to him during the occurrence of the incident. 7 As regards the allegations under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code, it appears that the supplementary statement 4 crap4191.11 of the complainant Bhimraj was recorded on the next day i.e. 21.7.2011, which reflects that he came to know from Vinayak Bhanudas Bathe that the accused persons set the roof of his house on fire and fled away. However, pertinently, the said supplementary statement of the complainant does not specify the names of the said accused persons. Apart from that, source of the information to the complainant in respect of the said supplementary statement is said Vinayak Bhanudas Bathe Hence, the statement of Vinayak Bhanudas Bathe was perused, which discloses that after lodging the complaints by both the parties against each other, the relatives of Anuradha set the roof of the house of the complainant on fire by igniting the matchstick and thereafter fled away, but no specific names of the said relatives of Anuradha have been mentioned therein and pertinently, names of the applicants herein have not been referred in both the said statements i.e. supplementary statement of the complainant Bhimraj and statement of Vinayak Bhanudas Bathe. 8 Apart from that, it also appears that Subhash Trimbak Jadhav, who is cousin of applicant no.1 has filed the complaint 5 crap4191.11 against the complainant and other co-accused persons under C.R. No. 294 of 2011 in respect of the incident occurred at about 1700 hours on 20.7.2011; whereas the present C.R. No. 295 of 2011, which is later one pertains to the occurrence of the alleged incident at 1830 hours on 20.7.2011, and hence, apparently, it appears that the present C.R. No. 295 is later one, and hence, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that same has been lodged by the complainant herein as a counter blast to C.R. No. 294 of 2011 filed by Subhash Jadhav. 9 In the circumstances, considering the accusations made against the applicants and the nature and gravity thereof, it appears that there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the applicants for further progress in the investigation, and therefore, they deserve grant of anticipatory bail. 10 In the result, present application is allowed and interim anticipatory bail granted to applicant no.1, namely Namdeo Murlidhar Jadhav on 27.9.2011 stands confirmed, on the conditions as mentioned below. 6 crap4191.11 11 Moreover, it is also directed that in the event of arrest of applicant no.2, namely Ketan Deelip Jadhav, under C.R. No. I-295 of 2011, registered at Pathardi police station, District Ahmednagar, he be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount. 12 Both the applicants shall adhere to the following conditions :- (i) Applicant Nos. 1 and 2 shall give attendance before the concerned investigator once in a week i.e. on every Monday between 5.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m., till filing of charge sheet, and shall cooperate in the investigation. (i) Applicant nos. 1 and 2 shall not influence upon the witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence, in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly. 13 The present application stands disposed of finally. 7 crap4191.11 14 It is made clear that the above observations are prima facie in nature 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. dbm/crap4191.11