1 crap3474.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3474 OF 2011 [Madan s/o Rajendra Sirsat and Sakharam s/o Tatyaba Zanzan vs State of Maharashtraand ors.] _________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _________________________________________________________________________________ Shri C.V.Thombare, advocate for the applicants Smt. R.K.Ladda, A.P.P. for respondents ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 20th August, 2011. PER COURT :- 1 Heard respective learned counsel for the parties. 2 This is an application preferred by applicant nos. 1 and 2 seeking anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest under C.R. No. 80 of 2011, registered at Neknur police station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 323, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by the 2 crap3474.11 complainant namely Chandrasen Sirsath on 7.7.2011, in respect of the alleged incident occurred on 2.7.2011. It is alleged in the said complaint that the incident occurred on 2.7.2011 and Rajendra i.e. father of applicant no.1 gave a blow of stick on the head of the complainant and complainant sustained bleeding injury. It is also alleged that applicant no.1 Madan drove motor cycle towards the son of the complainant, namely Ajay speedily with the intention to kill him, and thereby said Ajay fell down and sustained fracture of his left elbow due to the wheels of the said motor cycle, but it is also alleged that applicant no.2 Sakharam was present on the said motor cycle as the pillion rider. 4 On perusal of the investigation papers, it appears that there are two eye witnesses to the occurrence of the incident, namely Jiwan Wagh and Suresh Wagh, whose statements are in consonance of the complaint. Moreover, the injury certificate of Ajay discloses that he sustained one simple injury i.e. blunt trauma on left elbow joint and one grievous injury i.e. fracture of upper end of radius on left side. 5 Having the comprehensive view of the matter, it appears that the role of applicant no.1 Madan is vital and serious in the occurrence of the incident and accusations made against him apparently involve him in the alleged crime; whereas the role of applicant no.2 Sakharam appears to be of lesser 3 crap3474.11 degree to the extent of his presence as pillion rider on the motor cycle on the spot and not beyond that. 6 Moreover, interim anticipatory bail was granted to applicant no.2. Hence, same interim anticipatory bail granted to applicant no.2 Sakharam deserves to be confirmed. However, present application to the extent of applicant no.1 Madan is required to be rejected. 7 In the result, present application is allowed partly and interim anticipatory bail granted to applicant no.2, namely Sakharam Tatyaba Zanzan stands confirmed, with direction that he shall give attendance before the concerned investigator, as and when required, till filing of charge sheet and he shall cooperate in the investigation and also further direction that he shall not influence upon the witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence, directly or indirectly, in any manner whatsoever. However, application to the extent of applicant no.1, namely Madan Rajendra Sirsat stands rejected. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap3474.11