1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.: 276 OF 2009 Bhaskar Sadashiv Patil Versus State of Maharashtra and others *** Mr. V. B. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. D. R. Korde, A.P.P. for the Respondent/ State. *** CORAM: K. U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED: 25th SEPTEMBER, 2009. 1. Heard learned counsel. The Applicant is Sarpanch. The Respondent No.3 is the original complainant. However, in spite of due diligence, the notice to the Respondent NO.3 could not be served. The present remark is "she is out of station". The nature of allegations in the FIR 33 of 2009 has virtually forced the applicant herein to remain away from the village as he apprehends coercion. 2. Considering the nature of allegations, the investigator shall not take coercive action against the applicant for the offence under section 3 (1) (x) of the SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. 3. S. O. to 25th November, 2009. 4. Re-issue notice to Respondent No.3. [K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.] Dated:25/09/2009. ans/2765