1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1309 OF 2010 Yogesh Govind Arde and others ..Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra and another ..Respondents ..... Mrs.Madhaveshwari D. Thube-Mhase, Advocate for applicants Mr.P.P. More, APP for respondents. ..... (CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE,J.) DATE : 22nd April, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard Mrs.Madhaveshwari D. Thube-Mhase, learned Counsel for applicants and Mr.P.P. More, learned A.P.P. for respondents. 2. This is an application preferred by applicants seeking anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest under C.R. No.I-387/2008 registered with Kotwali police station, Dist.Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 452, 395, 427, 2 120-B of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 37(1)(3) & 135 of Bombay Police Act. 3. It appears that offence has been registered on the basis of complaint lodged by one Dr.Prakash Kanhayalal Kankariya on 24th December, 2008 alleging that on 24.10.2008, while he was present in his dispensary at that time about 6 persons along with 20 to 25 unknown persons entered into his Cabin and the names of said six persons have been reflected in the complaint. It is alleged that, all of them snatched golden chain of 5 Tolas and amount of Rs.70,000/- from the drawer of his table. One mobile hand set is also taken away by them. It has been further alleged that, they took him outside the Cabin applied blackist oil to his face and took him out of the Hospital and paraded him through street upto Kohinoor Cloth store. Subsequently, the names of three more accused were added. 4. On the aforesaid background, learned counsel for applicants submitted that entire investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed as well as Supplementary charge sheet has also been filed 3 but neither the names of applicants have been figured therein nor any specific role has been attributed to them in the occurrence of incident. 5. Learned A.P.P. Mr.More, conceded to the said position during the course of arguments. 6. Hence, in the light of aforesaid facts, possibility of false implication of applicants in the aforesaid offence can not be ruled out, and therefore, applicants herein deserve to be enlarged on bail in the event of their arrest in the aforesaid crime, since, there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of applicants furthermore. 7. In the result, the present application is allowed and it is directed that, in the event of arrest of applicant nos.1 to 4 under C.R. No.I-387/2008 registered with Kotwali police station, Dist.Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 452, 395, 427, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and under Section 37(1)(3) and 135 of the Bombay Police Act, they be released on bail on 4 furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each and on executing the P.R. bond in the like amount by each of them, on the following conditions : (a) Applicants shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required on given written intimation and shall co-operate with the investigation. (b) Applicants shall not tamper with prosecution evidence and/or shall not influence upon the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly. 8. These observations are prima facie observations 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 gas/cri1309.10