1 Cri.Appln.No.1631/2011 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1631/2011 ( Asif Khan Abdul Samad Khan Vs. The State of Maharashtra ) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. JV Deshpande, Adv. for Applicant/s; Mr. KS Patil APP for State. Mr.MK Deshpande, Adv. To assist APP. *** CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 5 th May, 2011. 1) Heard finally. The accused/applicant, while congratulating the complainant over a resolution of land dispute, allegedly assaulted on 15th March, 2011 with his son. The FIR implicate the accused. Mr. JV Deshpande, learned Counsel submits, the accused is in custody from 45 days, the injury suffered by complainant – Shaikh Mujtaba Rafiq Akram from MLC No.5085/AKK/11, demonstrated to be simple in nature though caused by a sharp weapon at right side of face pre-auricular; left fore-arm, chest and left flank. The counsel submits that thereafter the complainant got discharge and admitted to a private hospital. Any certification by said hospital looses its significance. According to him, since 45 days have lapsed, nothing more is to be required to continue him in fetters. 2) The learned APP, on instructions, submits 2 Cri.Appln.No.1631/2011 that as many as eight cases are faced by the applicant at different police stations, few of them are Crime Nos.23/2011; 323/2011 of Chhawani police station; Nos.203/2006 of Waluj police station; No.II 15/2004; 17/2004 of Begumpura police station. 3) Even if the accused/applicant claims to be facilitated in past, having coordinated few of the police officials in nabbing few culprits, however, that by itself primarily will not issue a license to him to take the law in hands and to assault the successful party in civil litigation. 4) Considering these aspects and since investigation is in progress, the application lacks merit, rejected. The observations are prima facie in nature. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/