(1) CRI.APP. 3428.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3428 OF 2010 1. Ramesh Hiraman Salunke 2. Sanjay S/o Hiraman Salunke 3. Gorakh S/o Hiraman Salunke .. Applicants VERSUS The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. B.V. Shirwadkar, Advocate for the Applicants Mr. B.J. Sonawane, APP for the respondent-State ... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 1ST SEPTEMBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. Heard learned counsel. 2. The Application is for anticipatory bail. The applicants seek directions under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure since they apprehend arrest in connection with crime no. I-51 of 2010 registered at MIDC Paithan Police Station for offence under section 302, 323, 504, 506 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that there is considerable delay of about 2 months caused by the (2) CRI.APP. 3428.2010 complainant for lodging of the FIR and the incident which is said to have occurred on 28.3.2010 is blown out of proportion. He would submit that there is no prima facie case to infer complicity of the applicants in regard to the offence of culpable homicide. He would submit that after 15 days N.C. Case was registered and that there is no nexus between the alleged incident and the death of deceased who died on 28.5.2010 at about 7.00 am. 3. Considering the recitals of the FIR, it prima facie appears that on 28.3.2010, the applicant no.1 asked husband of the informant to allow him electricity connection from the meter of the house of the informant. Her husband declined saying that if wireman would notice such illegal electricity connection then his meter may be removed. It is alleged that the applicants thereafter kicked on abdomen of the husband of the informant and, therefore, her husband fell down and become unconscious. He started whimpering and there were convulsions to his body. In the same night he was (3) CRI.APP. 3428.2010 rushed to a private hospital of Dr. Joshi at Paithan. The medical practitioner referred him to the Government hospital. It is stated that he was treated in the Government hospital at Aurangabad till 11.4.2010 and was discharged. He returned home thereafter but again in the same night he suffered pains. Though he was operated twice, he died on 28.5.2010 at about 7.00 am. 4. Whether there is any connection between the incident of assault by kicks on abdomen of the deceased and the death is a matter of investigation. It appears that the deceased was under medical treatment since the time of the incident and there was no intervening other reason for his sufferings. The charge levelled against the applicants is severe. It also appears from the opening paragraph of the FIR that there was prior enmity between the deceased and the applicants. 5. Considering the background facts, mere delay in lodging of the FIR cannot be treated as sufficient (4) CRI.APP. 3428.2010 ground to grant the extra-ordinary relief to the applicants. The discretion cannot be used in their favour which is likely to stall the effective investigation. Hence, the Application is dismissed. Sd/- [V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp