{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1625 OF 2010 1. Sunil Maroti Waghmare Age-20 years, Occ-Labour 2. Vikas Kailash Waghmare Age-19 years, Occ-Labour Both R/o Parda, Tq & Dist-Hingoli APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr. Joydeep Chatterjee, Advocate for the applicants Mr. S.G.Nandedkar, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 14th June 2010 PER COURT: 1. By preferring the present criminal application, both the applicants have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.18/2010 registered with Basamba Police Station, Dist-Hingoli for an offence punishable u/s 307, 323 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code with section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. {2} 2. It appears that interim protection was granted to the applicants vide order dated 28.05.2010 and learned APP was directed to call for the papers of investigation. 3. Learned APP has shown his helplessness and has stated that there is no cooperation on the part of the concerned Investigating Officer. It appears that this non cooperation is deliberate. It is experienced by this Court that since last one week in certain cases from certain police stations, inspite of repeated communications / correspondence, papers of investigation are not forwarded to the concerned APP. 4. In the light of the available record, which is annexed with the application, it appears that a complaint has been lodged against the present complainant on behalf of the present applicants in respect of the same incident for which offence is registered at CR No.17/2010. CR No.17/2010 is registered for an offence punishable under certain sections of Indian Penal Code with some sections of the Atrocities Act. 5. Perusal of papers of both the complaints indicate that the alleged incident occurred in the evening of 1st March 2010 at about 5.30 p.m. It also appears that the complaint lodged on behalf of the applicants is first in time and thereafter the present complaint i.e. CR No.18/2010 is lodged against the present {3} applicants. So far as complaint lodged on behalf of present applicants is concerned, the same is lodged for an offence punishable under the Atrocities Act. It appears that to give counter blast to the said complaint, the present complaint has been filed at CR No.18/2010. 6. Considering the allegations in both the complaints, it appears that overtact is alleged against the complainant, who is accused in CR No.17/2010. In the premise, case is made out to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail in exercise of the discretion vested in this Court. 7. In the result, the application is allowed. The interim protection granted to the applicants on 28.04.2010 is hereby confirmed and to remain in force till filing of the charge sheet. The applicants are directed to cooperate with the investigating agency and not to contact or tamper with the prosecution witnesses. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln1625-10