(1) CRI. APLN. 4887.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4887 OF 2010 1. Rohit @ Sheru S/o Ramesh Komatwar 2. Shamid S/o Yasin Pathan R/o Kallam, Tq. Kallam, Dist. Osmanabad APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and anr. RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. D.V. Tele, A.P.P. for the respondent/State. ..... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 30TH NOVEMBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. Heard. 2. The Application is under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The incident occurred in the evening of 26.6.2010 at about 6:30 pm. Allegedly, the applicants alongwith other 2-3 co- accused persons came in drunken condition from front of Richa Beer Bar while the complainant was (2) CRI. APLN. 4887.2010 proceeding towards Bhimnagar locality. They intercepted the motorcycle of the complainant's brother on which he and his brother were riding. They assaulted the complainant. They pushed him down and sat on his chest. It is alleged that the applicants pressed his neck and thereafter took away amount of Rs.10,000/- from his pocket and also snatched away a gold chain from his neck. It is alleged that immediately thereafter they boarded in an auto-rickshaw and fled away. 3. The learned Advocate for the applicants would submit that the story of the complainant is improbable because the complainant runs a taxi jeep vehicle to earn livelihood and could not have possessed amount of Rs.10,000/- with him. It is further argued that such allegation is made in order to aggravate the nature of the offence. It is important to notice that the complainant was proceeding on a motorcycle of his brother and there is no warrant to assume that he could not have possessed Rs.10,000/- and the gold chain. The F.I.R. itself shows that the applicants and their 2-3 co- (3) CRI. APLN. 4887.2010 accused persons were in inebriated condition. It appears that there was a previous incident due to parking of the auto-rickshaw on the road which was objected by the complainant and, therefore they intercepted the motorcycle in the relevant evening. It appears further that the F.I.R. was lodged in the same evening without loss of time. This conduct of the complainant prima facie shows absence of any oblique intention. It is noticed from the order of the Sessions Court that the applicants were found absconding from the date of incident. It is argued by the learned Advocate for the applicants that there was no injury sustained by the complainant. The applicants are framed up by adding more spice in the allegations while drafting the F.I.R. 4. At such a premature stage, it is difficult to say that the complainant concocted a story as indicated in the FIR. The Application therefore is destitute of merits and as such is dismissed. Sd/- [V. R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp