{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2989 OF 2010 Vishal s/o Babanrao Wakle APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mrs. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for the applicant Mr. K.S.Patil, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 29th July 2010 PER COURT: 1. By this application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.432/2009 registered with Topkhana police station, Ahmednagar for an offence punishable u/s 302, 307, 323, 504, 506, 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code with sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and section 37 (1) (3) and 135 of the Bombay Police Act, as the applicant is in jail since 19th December 2009. It is informed that after completion of investigation, charge sheet has been filed on 05.04.2010 before learned CJM, Ahmednagar and numbered as RTC No.16/2010. {2} 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP. 3. The said offence is registered on the complaint of one Maruti Dhangar in respect of an incident dated 18th December 2009 at about 8.30 p.m. which was offshoot of an earlier incident on the same day in the afternoon. As per the allegations in the complaint as well as statements of the witnesses disclose that at the relevant time applicant and 16 others, armed with weapons, attacked the house of the complainant and assaulted him with weapons. It is alleged that this applicant was having gupti in his hand and he assaulted on the stomach of Baban Bapu. There are allegations in the compliant that said Baban was also assaulted by one Sachin with sword in the stomach. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that this Court, vide order dated 9th March 2010 has granted bail application No. 355/2010 filed by said Sachin and hence on the ground of parity this applicant is also entitled for bail and therefore requested to allow the present bail application. 5. This Court in para No.3 of the order dated 09.03.2010 has observed thus - 3. Perusal of papers of investigation discloses that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of one Maruti Vitthal about the incident occurred in the {3} night of 18/12/2009, as in the evening, because of earlier quarrel took place of his nephew with one Vishal Wakale, Vishal Wakale and his associates attacked on the residential premises of the complainant and his family members. Present applicant is one of that associate. During that attack, free fight took place between the group of Vishal Wakale as well as of the complainant. The allegations against present applicant is that he was holding sword in his hand and attacked on one Baban Shinde. The specific role attributed to this applicant is that with the help of sword in his hand, he assaulted Baban Shinde. The fact remains that participation of the applicant in the said evidence can not be rulled out. The only point for consideration is whether this participation at the hands of present applicant and the injuries, the result of assault, amounting to an ofence punishable u/s. 307 of IPC or other grevious offence. The medical certificate of the injured is on record which shows that the injured has sustained two injuries. The nature of the injuries is stab injuries. One is over the abdomen and second is on left lumbar region. The injured was admitted in the hospital on 18/12/2009 and was discharged on 21/12/2009. The injury certificate do not disclose any dislocation, fracture of any human organ. In the premise, it can not be said that the injuries sustained are likely to cause death of the injured. During the course of submissions across the bar, it is urged that after discharge from the Government Hospital, the injured took treatment in the private hospital. What is the nature of that treatment, no papers are available to that effect. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the injured because of assault of the present applicant, can not be termed as injuries likely to cause death of the injured even though the applicant has participated in the said free fight and riot. As the applicant is behind bars for more than 85 days, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on certain conditions. {4} 4. In the premise and on the ground of party so also considering the fact that the applicant is behind the bars since last 6 months, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on bail. 5. In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant be released on bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. The applicant is prohibited from entering village Weduwadi, Tq & Dist- Ahmednagar till disposal of the trial. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2989-10