1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3594 OF 2009 1. Shaikh Khalil S/o.Sk.Imamsab, Age- 60 years, Occu-Retired, 2. Shaikh Khayum S/o.Sk.Imamsab, Age-45 years, Occu-Retired, Ex-Serviceman, 3. Shaikh Kalim S/o. Sk.Jalil, Age-35 years, Occu-Auto Driver, 4. Shaikh Naim S/o.Sk.Jalil, Age-32 years, Occu-Labourer, 5. Shaikh Wasim S/o.Sk.Mannan, Age-29 years, Occu-Business, 6. Shaikh Khaja S/o.Sk.Jawed, Age-21 years, Occu-Student, All R/o.Karkheli, Tq.Dharmabad, Dist. Nanded APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station, Dharmabad, Dist. Nanded. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Nanded, Dist. Nanded RESPONDENTS Mr.U.B.Bilolikar, learned counsel for the applicants. Mr.N.B.Patil, learned APP for respondents. 2 (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 13/11/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants who are arrayed as accused in CR No.78/2009, registered in Dharmabad Police Station for an offence punishable u/s. 143, 147, 148, 149, 395, 323 and 324 of The IPC r/w. Some of the sections under The Bombay Police Act, approached this Court to release them on bail in case of arrest in the aforesaid crime. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicants followed by learned APP appearing for the State. The record of the application shows that at the initial stage on 14/10/2009, interim protection was given to these applicants in case of their arrest in connection aforesaid offence registered in Dharmabad Police Station, they be released on bail on furnishing on surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing the PR bond in the like amount. 3. The papers of investigation shows that like an offence registered against these applicants, the complainant in this offence i.e. CR No. 78/2009, another complaint was registered against the complainant and his associates vide CR No.77/2009 by these applicants. So far as the sections which were under this complaint lodged by these applicants are same like in the complaint which is lodged against 3 these applicants also. The alleged incident appeared to be occurred on 11/09/2009 at about 9.00 a.m. when there are counter complaints, it is necessary to consider which party is aggressive. But considering the nature of accusation as alleged in both the complaints, it appears that both the parties have played the equal role at least as per the paper work carried out by the same Investigation Officer and if it is so, considering the vague allegations against the applicant no.3 and 4 and the role which is shown as played by the applicants no.1,2,5 and 6, a case is made out to use the discretion. In the premise, this application require following order. O R D E R 1. Application is hereby allowed. 2. The interim protection granted to these applicants is hereby extended/continued for the period of 4 weeks. Within that time, leave to applicants to apply for regular bail. 3. Applicants not to contact or tamper the prosecution’s witnesses. 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly. 5. Condition already imposed on these applicants to give the attendance to the Police Station is still to continue during the period of 4 weeks. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/NOV 2009/cri.appl.3594-09