IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2007 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2007 OF 2008 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2007 OF 2008 1. Shri Rajabhau Baburao Lonkar, 2. Shri Vitthal Baburao Lonkar. ... Applicants. V/s. 1. The State of Maharashtra, 2. Police Inspector, Hedapsar Police Station, Pune. ... Respondents. A.V.Anturkar with S.B.Deshmukh for the applicants. S.R.Shinde, A.P.P. for the respondents. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. CORAM: V.C.DAGA, J. DATED: 2nd July 2008. DATED: 2nd July 2008. DATED: 2nd July 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: ---- ---- ---- . Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicants are seeking bail in connection with C.R.No.271/2008 registered with Hadapsar Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under sections 307, 395, 143, 147, 148, 149, 342, 333, 363, 353, 336, 427, 323 and 504 of Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case as stated in the F.I.R is that on 22nd May, 2008, at about 11.00 p.m., the applicants along with other accused were present in the J.B.Beer Shopy. The complainant, who is a Police Head Constable who was on patrolling duty, asked to close down the shop. At that time accused persons armed with weapons assaulted the complainant. Statements of Mukesh Purshottam Gaikwad and Krishnakumar Ramdas Naidu recorded under section 164 of Cr.P.C. were presented before this Court. After having gone through the same, it is clear that the present applicants were instigating the other accused to indulge in the offence alleged. 4. As a matter of fact, looking to the allegations and material available on record, none of the applicants is entitled to bail. However, considering the age of applicant No.1, who is 80 years old, in my view, he can be granted bail. 5. In view of the above, so far as applicant No.2 applicant No.2 applicant No.2 is concerned, this application is rejected rejected rejected. 6. So far as applicant No.1 is concerned, I am inclined to grant bail in his favour, subject to the following conditions: (a) The applicant No.1, arrested in connection with C.R.No.271/2008 registered with Hadapsar Police Station, Pune shall be - 3 - enlarged on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two local sureties to make up the said amount. (b) The applicant No.1 shall report to the concerned Police Station once in a week, i.e. on every Monday between 3.00 to 5.00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial. He shall co-operate with the investigating agency for disposal of the case. (c) The order of bail will be given effect only after the applicant No.1 furnishes to the investigating officer the details about his place of residence and address where he proposes to stay after he is enlarged on bail. He will not change his residential address thereafter till the conclusion of trial without prior intimation to the investigating officer. (d) The applicant No.1 shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement or threat or pressurise any prosecution witnesses and shall not in any manner tamper with the - 4 - prosecution evidence. (e) It is needless to mention that breach of any of the conditions by the applicant No.1 shall result in cancellation of bail. (f) Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as finding or expression on merits of the case at the time of trial. 7. Application stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE