( 1 ) Cri.Appln5239-5253-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5239 OF 2010 Chandrakant Bhaskar Patil APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5253 OF 2010 Milind Dhaulatrao Patil & another APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT .... Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar, advocate for the applicants in both the applications. Mr. P.P. More, APP for the respondent/State in both the applications. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 21st December, 2010] PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. Considering the involvement of the applicant - Chandrakant, as narrated in the FIR, there is direct involvement alleged in as much as he threatened the staff members of the M.S.E.D.C.L. and instigated the mob of ( 2 ) Cri.Appln5239-5253-10 villagers to snatch away the Video Camera which was being used for the video-taping. He is the Police Patil of the village and yet, instead of assisting the Public Officers, attempted to instigate the villagers to interfere in the work of the officials of the M.S.E.D.C.L. He threatened them and asked them as to how they entered the village without his permission. Considering these aspects and the arrogance of the applicant Chandrakant Patil, which prima facie borne out from the recitals of the FIR, his application for anticipatory bail (Cri.Appln. No. 5239/2010) stands rejected. 3. So far as another application (Cri. Appln. No. 5253/2010) is concerned, issue notice. Learned APP waives service of notice and seeks time to produce relevant investigation papers and to make submissions. In the meanwhile, by way of ad-interim relief, the applicants are directed to be released on bail, in the event of their arrest, on furnishing bail bonds in sum of Rs. 15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand) each, before the Arresting Officer. S.O. to 5th January, 2011. [V.R. KINGAONKAR] JUDGE NPJ/criapln5239-5253-10 ( 3 ) Cri.Appln5239-5253-10