1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3728 OF 2009 1. Harshal S/o.Vijaysingh Girase, Age-27 years, Occu-Hotel Owner, 2. Tushar S/o.Nandkishor Girase, Age-22 years, Occu-Student, Both R/o.Shirpur, Tq.Shirpur, Dist. Dhule APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, 2. Superintendent of Police, Dhule, Dist. Dhule RESPONDENTS Smt.S.S.Jadhav, learned counsel for the applicants. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for State (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 17/11/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants have prayed to release then on anticipatory bail in case of their arrest in connection with C.R.No.226/2009, registered in Shirur Police Station of Dist. Dhule for an offence punishable u/s. 395, 307, 326, 324, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506 and 427 of IPC and u/s.37(1)(3) r/w.135 of The Bombay Police Act. 2 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicants followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for State. As the notice of this application was already served upon the respondent State, papers of investigation till carried out are placed in my hand for my perusal. 3. Considering the submissions across the bar and perusal of papers of investigation shows that offence of Crime No.226/2009 is registered on the basis of complaint of one Manoj Suresh Patil. It is to be considered that the alleged incident took place in the night of 25/09/2009. There were alteration of words took place with one Ambalal and one Sachin, who were chessed by this complainant and after they reached the hotel owned by the first applicant where alteration of words took place between two friends of complainant and these Ambalal and Sachin. During that scuffle, the complainant called his other associates and because of that riot took place in the hotel owned by first applicant. It is urged across the bar that on perusal of the papers of investigation, neither the name of 2nd applicant arrayed anywhere in the complaint or disclosed in the statement of witnesses recorded during the investigation. At the same time, the statement of the eye witnesses recorded during the investigation are stereo type statements and not attributed to any specific role played by the first applicant and if he has tried to save the damage of his own property, he can not be faulted with. At the same time, about the same incident occurred in the hotel of the first applicant in which already complaint is lodged by the Manager of the 3 Hotel against these applicants and his associates who have committed the riot in the property of the first applicant which crime is numbered as C.R.No.225/2009. 4. The application is opposed by the learned APP relying on the statement of one Chetan and one Pawan. According to the learned APP, the statement of these witnesses during the investigation discloses the particular role played by the first applicant. The papers of investigation shows no role played by 2nd applicant at any point of time. 5. Perused the papers in the light of these submissions across the bar. Apart from it, it is submitted by the learned APP that the FIR is totally silent and even not whispered about the disclosure of the participation of the 2nd applicant during the alleged incident. Papers of investigation are also silent about any participation by the 2nd applicant. 6. So far as the first applicant is concerned, it can not be disputed that the alleged incident took place in his property and his property was damaged by the friends of the complainant in CR No.226/2009. Considering the statements on which reliance is kept by learned APP appearing for the State, these statements are stereo type statements except changing the names of those witnesses which are not attributing any specific role played even by the first applicant and if the first applicant have attempted anything to save his property, he 4 can not be faulted with. In the premise, a fit case made out by the applicants to enlarge them in case of their arrest in connection with this offence. In the premise, the application deserves following order : O R D E R 1. In case of arrest of these applicants in connection with Crime No.226/2009, they be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each and on executing the PR bond in the like amount. 2. This protection is granted to these applicants for the period of 4 weeks. Within meantime, they may apply for regular bail. 3. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/NOV 2009/cri.appl.3728-09