1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 224 OF 2009 Ganpat Govind Dhoom ..... Applicant. V/s State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...... Respondents. ------ Mr. H.I. Palwe for the applicant. Mrs. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the State. ------ ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATIONNO. 225 OF 2009 Gangadhar Ravji Gawli ...... Applicant. V/s State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...... Respondents. ------ Mr. H.I. Palwe for the applicant. Mrs. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the State. ------ CORAM : V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 22nd January, 2009 P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned APP for the State. 2. In both the above Criminal Applications applicants are arrested as an accused in a complaint registered at Peth Police Station vide C.R. No.I69/2008 for the offence 2 punishable under sections 307, 326, 323, 504, 506, 143, 147 and 148 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 37(1)(3) and section 135 of the Bombay Police Act Applicants are forest guards. The other applicant had come with stick. 3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 27/12/2008 at about 5.30 p.m. the complainant was coming home and, at that time, Pandurang Malgave called him and requested him to resolve the dispute in respect of certain plot of land. At that time, it is alleged that the wife of the said Malgave abused the complainant and his son assaulted him with a stick on his head and face. Due to said commotion, certain villagers came at the site. Applicant herein is one of them. It is alleged that the applicant gave fist blows to the complainant and his son and the other villagers assaulted them with stick on their hands and feet. A cross complaint also was filed by the other group in which it is alleged that the complainant in this case was the aggressor. Injuries were caused to the persons from both the groups. 4. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants submits that the applicants are Government Servants and their name have been falsely implicated. It is submitted that, in fact, they were on duty at that time and, in any event, the only allegation which is made against these applicants is that they had given fist blows and the said incident had taken place after the assault by Tulshiram and 3 his son was over. It is submitted that, therefore, the applicants be granted anticipatory bail. 5. It is an admitted position that the complaint and cross- complaint has been filed against each other. There was a dispute over certain plot of land. Even according to the complainant, the applicants herein arrived at the scene at a subsequent stage. The possibility that the applicants tried to intervene in the quarrel and for that purpose tried to separate both the groups cannot be ruled out. The other villagers also assaulted Tulshiram and his son. Even according to his own version, they gave fist blows on their hands and feet with sticks. According to the complainant, the grievous injury was cased to Tulshriam and his son by the main accused. Prima facie, it does appear that the applicants did not share common intention with other accused. 6. Under these circumstances, applicants, in the event of their arrest in connection with C.R. No I-69/2008 registered at Peth Police Station, District Nashik for the offence punishable under sections 307, 326, 323, 504, 506, 143, 147, 148 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 37(1)(3) and section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, be released on bail in the sum of Rs 5000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount. Applicants shall cooperate with the Police. Applicants shall report to the Police from 27/1/2009 to 30/1/2009 and thereafter as and when called. 4 7. Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations made by this Court in this order for granting anticipatory bail to the applicants since no finding is recorded on merits and it shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law. 8. Applications are disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.)