1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1544 OF 2010 Sidharth Ratan Wahul & anr. ...Applicants VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & anr. ...Respondent ..... Shri N.S. Ghanekar, Advocate for the applicants Shri D.V. Tele, A.P.P. for the respondents ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 6th May, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr. N.S. Ghanekar, learned counsel for the applicants as well as heard Mr. D.V. Tele, learned A.P.P. for the respondents. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant Nos.1 and 2, seeking anticipatory bail, apprehending their arrest under C.R. No.I-85/2010, registered at Osmanpura Police Station, Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 2 148, 149 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It appears that, the offence has been registered on the complaint lodged by Bhausaheb Prakash Kharat on 6.3.2010 in respect of the occurrence of the incident of assault at about 21.30 Hrs. on 5.3.2010. 4. Apparently, it appears from the contents of the complaint that there are omnibus allegations against the applicants that they allegedly abused and intimidated the complainant and his family members and assaulted them by sticks and apparently, there is no specific role/ overt act attributed to the applicants herein during the said occurrence of the incident. 5. It is pointed out that, about 7 persons were injured during the said assault. However, their injury certificates disclose that they sustained simple injuries. Moreover, although the injury certificate of Sachin and Ushabai disclose that they sustained head injuries, the said injuries appear to be of simple nature. Hence, the learned counsel for the applicants canvassed that the ingredients of Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code are apparently absent in the present offence. 3 6. In the light of the aforesaid facts, the possibility of false implication of the applicants cannot be ruled out in the alleged offence and apparently, there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the applicants and, therefore, present application deserves to be allowed. 7. In the result, interim protection granted to the applicant Nos.1 and 2 stands confirmed and it is directed that, in the event of arrest of the applicant Nos.1 and 2 under C.R. No.I-85/2010, registered at Osmanpura Police Station, Aurangabad, they be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing P.R. bond in the like amount, on following conditions:- (i) The applicant Nos.1 and 2 shall attend the concerned police station as and when required, on written intimation, till filing of the charge sheet, and shall cooperate in the investigation. (ii) The applicant Nos.1 and 2 shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence upon the witnesses directly/ indirectly. 8. Needless to say that, the above anticipatory bail granted to the applicant Nos.1 and 2 is till filing of the charge sheet and one 4 week thereafter. It is also made clear that, the above observations are prima facie in nature and shall not come in way of any Court while deciding the matter on merits. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE) JUDGE fmp/cri154410