ABA-432-11.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.432 OF 2011 Bhausaheb Sudam Shelke ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. S.V. Kotwal i/b. Mr. M.S. Mohite for the Applicant. Mrs. A.A. Mane, APP, for the Respondent. Mr. Dilip Shukla for the First Informant. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 8 TH JUNE, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Kotwal, the learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mrs. Mane, the learned APP for the Respondent, and Mr. Shukla, the learned Advocate for the First Informant, who undertakes to file his Vakalatnama within one week. 2. The Applicant, who is one of the accused in C.R. No.56 of 2011 of Shirur Police Station, Dist. Pune, apprehends his arrest in the said case and, therefore, seeks anticipatory bail. 3. Admittedly, initially, the case was registered only in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 341, 363, 323 of the IPC, ABA-432-11.sxw 2 Dixit which are, all, bailable. The Applicant is not named as one of the assailants, in the F.I.R. No.56 of 2011 lodged on 15th February, 2011. On 20th February, 2011, a supplementary statement of the First Informant was recorded in which he advanced a version that, at the time of the incident, a revolver was shown to him by one Akash Chavan, who is said to be a member of the unlawful assembly, and that the First Informant was threatened that he would be killed. Based on the version in the supplementary statement, the accusation of an offence punishable under Section 364 of the IPC and of an offence punishable under Section 25 of the Arms Act, which are non- bailable, was added. 4. Mr. Kotwal points out to me that an incident had taken place on 16th February, 2011 in respect of which a report was lodged by one Ganesh Rode against the First Informant and the members of his group alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 341, 363, 323 of the IPC and also of offences punishable under the Arms Act and the Bombay Police Act. He submits, that it is after the First Informant in the present case was arrested in connection with the said C.R., the version, as reflected from the supplementary statement, was advanced, for obvious reasons. 5. Even as per the version in the supplementary statement, it is not the present Applicant who allegedly showed a pistol and threatened to kill the First Informant. ABA-432-11.sxw 3 Dixit 6. Moreover, Mr. Dilip Shukla, the learned Advocate on behalf of the First Informant, states that he has no objection if anticipatory bail is granted, as the parties have decided to settle their differences and live in peace. 7. Under the circumstances, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail. 8. In the event of the arrest of the Applicant in C.R. No.56 of 2011 of Shirur Police Station, Dist. Pune, he be released on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/-, with one surety in like amount, on the condition to attend the Police Station and make himself available for investigation / interrogation as and when required by the I.O. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]