1 Appln. 3847/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3847 OF 2010 Bala Keshav Jagde & Anr. .... Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Mr. S.P. Parab, Advocate for applicants. Mr. Y.M. Nakhawa, APP for State. Coram : Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J. Date : 1st September, 2010 P.C. 1. The two applicants herein apprehend their arrest in C.R. No.60 of 2010 registered with Padgha Police Station, Thane under Section 395 Indian Penal Code. They had earlier filed an application for anticipatory bail before the Court of Sessions, which was dismissed on 20th July 2010. The facts of the C.R. No.60 of 2010 are that on 29th June 2010, when the complainant was proceeding on motor cycle along with another person by Mumbai-Agra Highway towards Shahapur, at about 9.30 pm, he was stopped on the way by 6 persons. 3 persons were sitting on the motor cycle parked on the road and 3 persons were standing on the road. One of them stopped the motor cycle of the complainant, other caught his collar and slapped him on the face and demanded money. The third 2 Appln. 3847/2010 person removed the money from the raincoat pocket of the complainant consisting of 5 notes of Rs.100/- denomination. The pillion rider with the complainant got scared and started running. Then the 6 persons chased him. The complainant lodged his complaint with Padgha Police Station. In the complaint, he gave descriptions of six persons. Based on the description given, the Police arrested 3 persons on 30th June 2010. The names of the present applicants were disclosed by the 3 persons arrested. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegations contained in the complaint cannot be said to be very serious because it involves only Rs.500/-. He also points out that the complaint does not named any person including the applicants. He also submits that the applicants are businessmen and are willing to co-operate with the Police during the course of investigation. Merely because the amount involved in the incident of robbery is small i.e. Rs.500/-, the gravity of the offence does not get reduced. Considering the facts of the case and nature of the offence committed, in my opinion, this is not the fit case for exercise of special and discretionary powers of the court to grant anticipatory bail. Hence, the application is rejected. (Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J) (Smt. R.P. SondurBaldota, J)