Cri.Application No.5238 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5238 OF 2010 1. Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar, Age 28 years, Occu.Agri., 2. Ashok Vithoba Gaikwad, Age 35 years, Occu.Agri., 3. Subhash Bapurao Malvadkar, Age 50 years, Occu.Agri., 4. Ramdas Jagannath Malvadkar, Age 38 years, Occu.Agri., 5. Dilip Sahebrao Malvadkar, Age 55 years, Occu.Agri., 6. Anil Nanasaheb Sawant, Age 29 years, Occu.Agri., 7. Santosh Nana Sawant, Age 24 years, Occu.Agri., 8. Hanumant Bhimrao Wagh, Age 27 years, Occu.Agri., 9. Vishwanath Bapu Malvadkar, Age 40 years, Occu.Agri., 10. Vasant Yogiraj Malvadkar, Age 38 years, Occu.Agri., 11. Arjun Digambar Malvadkar, Age 32 years, Occu.Agri., 12. Bijishen Jalinder Talekar, Age 22 years, Occu.Agri., 13. Bibhishan Dnyandeo Talekar, Age 32 years, Occu.Agri., 14. Somnath Balkrushna Malvadkar, Age 22 years, Occu.Agri., Cri.Application No.5238 of 2010 2 15. Sunil Dhondiba Mulik, Age 40 years, Occu.Agri., Petitioner Nos.1 to 15 R/o Babhulgaon—Dumala, Taluka Karjat, Dist.Ahmednagar ..APPLICANTS (Orig.Accused) Versus The State of Maharashtra through Police Station Officer, Karjat Police Station, Karjat, District Ahmednagar ..RESPONDENT Mr R.N.Dhorde, Advocate holding for Mr. N.V.Gaware, Advocate for applicants Mr N.H.Borade, A.P.P. for respondent-State CORAM : P.V. HARDAS, J. DATE : 14th January 2011 PER COURT 1. This application has been filed by the applicants 1 to 15, under Section 439 of the Indian Penal Code seeking their enlargement on bail in Crime No.157/2010, registered by the Karjat Police Station, District Ahmednagar for offences punishable under Section 324, 307, 326, 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 354, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and under Section 37(1)(3)/135 of the Bombay Police Act and under Section 3(i) (ii) (v) (vii) (x) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and under Section 7(1) (d) of Protection of Civil Rights Act. It also Cri.Application No.5238 of 2010 3 appears that the present applicants along with others had filed Criminal Miscellaneous Application before the Sessions Court at Ahmednagar praying for their release on bail, which came to be rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar by order dated 7.12.2010. About 22 applicants had filed application for bail before the Sessions Court while only 15 applications have filed the present application. 2. It further appears that the applicants had filed Criminal Application Nos.4348/2010, 4135/2010 and 4136/2010 in this Court praying for their enlargement on bail in the said crime. The aforesaid applications had been filed prior to filing of the charge-sheet while the present application has been filed after filing of the charge-sheet and after rejection of their application by the Sessions Court, Ahmednagar. 3. First Information Report came to be filed by one Abhimanyu Kisan Chavan in respect of an incident which occurred on 6.9.2010 at 6.30 p.m. in the said village. In the first information report names of about 60 accused had been disclosed, who according to the first informant had formed an unlawful assembly and who had armed with various weapons, which are adverted to in the first information report. The report further alleges that the assembly after abuses on the basis of caste and the mob exhorted others to assault and accordingly some persons of the mob had assaulted the complainant and others and had entered the house of one Cri.Application No.5238 of 2010 4 Anita Ramesh Chavan and had stripped her. Since this application for bail has been filed after filing of the charge-sheet, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has made available to me the copy of the charge- sheet, which has been submitted in the Court. 4. Mr R.N.Dhorde, learned Counsel for the applicants has urged before me that against the present applicants viz. applicants 1 to 15 no overt acts are attributed to them in the statements of the witnesses and, therefore, this would be a fit case for enlarging them on bail. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has opposed the submission and has tendered before me a chart, which referred to the overt acts attributed to the applicants by the witnesses. With the assistance of the learned Counsel for the parties, I have perused the statements of the witnesses and perusal of the statements of the witnesses discloses that Anita refers to the presence of applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar, who she states was armed with a stick. One Nandabai Jagannath Chavan also refers to the presence of applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar, who is alleged to have been armed with a stick and who had assaulted the witnesses. Dattatraya Jagannath Chavan also states that applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar was armed with a stick while applicant No.3 Subhash Bapurao Malvadkar had assaulted him by a stick on his head. Rahul Raosaheb Kharade also refers to the presence of applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar as being armed with a stick Cri.Application No.5238 of 2010 5 and who had assaulted the witness. Sachin Devidas Mohite in his statement under Section 161, Cr.P.C. alleges that applicant No.15 Sunil Dhondiba Mulik was holding a stone while applicant No.6 Anil Nanasaheb Sawant was present in the mob and had assaulted. Sachin also refers to the presence of applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar as having assaulted this witness. Deepak Bhagchand Kamble refers to the presence of applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar as armed with a stick while applicant No.6 Anil Nanasaheb Sawant holding a stone and assaulting this witness. Prakash Abhimanyu Chavan refers to the presence of applicant No.3 Bibhishan Dnyandeo Talekar as having assaulted this witness with fists and kicks while applicant No.6 Anil Nanasaheb Sawant and applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar also having assaulted him. Dhamabai Sitaram Kharade and Anil Vithoba Gaikwad referred to the presence of applicant No.6 Anil Nanasaheb Sawant, applicant No.2 Ashok Vithoba Gaikwad, applicant No.8 Hanumant Bhimrao Wagh, applicant No.3 Subhash Bapurao Malvadkar and applicant No.13 Bibhishan Dnyandeo Talekar. Jagannath Vithoba Chavan refers to the presence of applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar and applicant No.2 Ashok Vithoba Gaikwad. Similarly, Gajanan Balasaheb Kharade refers to the presence of applicant No.15 Sunil Dhondiba Mulik and applicant No.6 Anil Nanasaheb Sawant. 5. Thus, from the perusal of the statements of the witnesses it would Cri.Application No.5238 of 2010 6 be apparent that these witnesses in no uncertain terms have referred to the presence and have attributed to the overt acts of the applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar, applicant No.2 Ashok Vithoba Gaikwad, applicant No.3 Subhash Bapurao Malvadkar, applicant No.6 Anil Nanasaheb Sawant, applicant No.8 Hanumant Bhimrao Wagh, applicant No.13 Bibhishan Dnyandeo Talekar and applicant No.15 Sunil Dhondiba Mulik. In respect of the other applicants, there does not appear to be any reference in the statements and no overt acts appeared to have been attributed to them. Thus, prima facie case appears to have been made out against applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar, applicant No.2 Ashok Vithoba Gaikwad, applicant No.3 Subhash Bapurao Malvadkar, applicant No.6 Anil Nanasaheb Sawant, applicant No.8 Hanumant Bhimrao Wagh, applicant No.13 Bibhishan Dnyandeo Talekar and applicant No.15 Sunil Dhondiba Mulik. These applicants, therefore, according to me would not be entitled to be released on bail. Since no prima facie case is made out against the other applicants, the application filed by applicant No.4 Ramdas Jagannath Malvadkar, applicant No.5 Dilip Sahebrao Malvadkar, applicant No.7 Santosh Nana Sawant, applicant No.9 Vishwanath Bapu Malvadkar, applicant No.10 Vasant Yogiraj Malvadkar, applicant No.11 Arjun Digambar Malvadkar, applicant No.12 Bijishen Jalindar Talekar and applicant No.14 Somnath Balkrushna Malvadkar. Cri.Application No.5238 of 2010 7 6. This application, therefore, is partly allowed. Applicant Nos.4 Ramdas Jagannath Malvadkar, applicant No.5 Dilip Sahebrao Malvadkar, applicant No.7 Santosh Nana Sawant, applicant No.9 Vishwanath Bapu Malvadkar, applicant No.10 Vasant Yogiraj Malvadkar, applicant No.11 Arjun Digambar Malvadkar, applicant No.12 Bijishen Jalindar Talekar and applicant No.14 Somnath Balkrushna Malvadkar are directed to be released on bail on each of the applicant executing a P.R.bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court on the condition that the applicants after shall not influence the prosecution witnesses nor shall they tamper with the prosecution evidence. In addition, these applicants shall attend the Karjat Police Station district Ahmednagar once a week on each Sunday between 8 to 10 a.m. till the charge is framed by the Sessions Court. Application filed by applicant No.1 Nandkumar Mohan Malvadkar, applicant No.2 Ashok Vithoba Gaikwad, applicant No.3 Subhash Bapurao Malvadkar, applicant No.6 Anil Nanasaheb Sawant, applicant No.8 Hanumant Bhimrao Wagh, applicant No.13 Bibhishan Dnyandeo Talekar and applicant No.15 Sunil Dhondiba Mulik stands rejected. ( P.V. HARDAS, J.) (vvr/5238.10criappln)