(1) Cri. Application No. 3905 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Criminal Application No. 3905 of 2011 1. Janardhan s/o. Hariba Waghmare, Age : 60 years, Occupation : Labour, R/o. Harangul (Kh.), Taluka and District : Latur. 2. Vimalbai w/o. Janardhan Waghmare, Age : 50 years, Occupation : Labour, R/o. As above. 3. Pravin s/o. Janardhan Waghmare, Age : 22 years, Occupation : Education, R/o. As above. 4. Santosh s/o. Janardhan Waghmare, Age : 29 years, Occupation : Labour, R/o. As above. .. Applicants. versus The State of Maharashtra, Through P.P. High Court Bench at Aurangabad (M.I.D.C. Police Station, Latur) .. Respondent. ....................... (2) Cri. Application No. 3905 of 2011 Mr. Avinash M. Nagarkar, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. B.V. Wagh, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent. ........................ CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 27TH SEPTEMBER 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Perused the investigation papers which were made available for inspection purpose, and heard learned respective Counsel for the parties, finally. 2. This is an application preferred by applicant nos.1 to 4, seeking anticipatory bail, apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 136/2011, registered at MIDC Police Station, Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 392, 452, read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the complainant, namely, Rajashree Sidheshwar Zunje, on 25th August 2011, alleging that on 24th August 2011, at about 7.30 p.m., when she was present in (3) Cri. Application No. 3905 of 2011 her house, the applicants entered into her house, gave abuses to her and assaulted her, as well as, assaulted her husband and son. It is also alleged that the applicants snatched away the gold Ganthan from her neck forcibly, worth Rs. 30,000/-, and also took away cash amount of Rs. 3,000/- from the possession of her husband forcibly. 4. On the aforesaid background, learned Counsel for the applicants canvassed that the wife of applicant no.2 herein, namely, Vimalbai, had already filed complaint against the complainant herein and others on 25th August 2011, at about 3.10 p.m., which is registered as Crime No. 3020/2011, in respect of the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and Sections 323, 504, 506, read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, and present complainant Rajashree has filed present C.R. No. 136/2011 as a counter blast to the complainant lodged by the wife of applicant no.1. Learned Counsel for the applicants also submitted that the present complaint filed by the complainant is false and no such incident occurred and the applicants are poor labourers, and the complainant has implicated the applicants under the present C.R. falsely. 5. Learned APP, for the respondent, countered the said (4) Cri. Application No. 3905 of 2011 arguments and opposed the present application vehemently, and submitted that there are 3 - 4 eye witnesses of the incident whose statements have been recorded during the course of investigation. Moreover, it is also canvassed that the gold Ganthan allegedly snatched by the applicants from the neck of the complainant, and the amount of Rs. 3000/- forcibly taken away by the applicants from the possession of the husband of the complainant, are yet to be recovered, and hence, custody of the applicants is necessary therefor. It is also submitted by the learned APP, that there is no further progress in the investigation since the applicants are not available for the investigation purpose, and further submitted, that the custodial interrogation of the applicants is necessary for the said progress in the investigation, and urged that the present application be dismissed. 6. Considering the rival submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties, apparently, names of the applicants have been reflected in the contents of the FIR and specific role has been attributed to each of them during occurrence of the incident. Moreover, the gold Ganthan allegedly snatched by the applicants from the neck of the complainant, worth Rs. 30,000/-, as well as, cash of Rs. 3,000/- taken away by the applicants from the possession of husband of the complainant, are yet to be recovered. Besides, the (5) Cri. Application No. 3905 of 2011 investigation papers disclose that the investigating agency has recorded statements of 3 - 4 eye witnesses, which apparently, are in consonance with the contents of the present complaint i.e. Crime No. 136/2011, which apparently, amounts to incriminating evidence against the applicants. 7. In the circumstances, considering the accusations made against the applicants and the nature and gravity thereof, apparently, there is prima facie case against the applicants, and therefore, complicity of the applicants in the alleged crime is apparent, and therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicants is inevitable and imperative for further progress in the investigation in proper perspective. 8. In the result, present Criminal Application lacks merits, and therefore, stands dismissed, and is disposed of finally. 9. However, it is made clear that the above observations are prima facie in nature, and same 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 bgp/3905ka