1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1592 OF 2010 (Shrikrishna Manoharrao Halde and another .v. State of Maharashtra) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri R.M. Patwardhan, Advocate for the applicant. Shri M.J. Khan, APP for the respondent/State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J. 26TH NOVEMBER, 2010. Heard. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are already granted ad-interim protection vide order dated 05th October, 2010. Reply is filed by the learned APP on behalf of the State. The applicants are the accused in Crime No. 3092/2010 registered with Police Station, Kalmeshwar, District Nagpur. It was alleged in the complaint that the applicants had abused the complainant and threatened him. The abuses given to the complainant were on his caste. In view of the statement in the complaint, offence under Sections 294, 506 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3(1)(vi) of Atrocities Act came to be registered. In the reply filed by the State, it is stated that the investigating agency has collected the material which includes the statement of the complainant. It is stated by the complainant that the incident was witnessed by certain persons. The statements of those persons were recorded by the investigating agency so that they have shown clear ignorance about the said incident. Further, it is also stated in the reply that the complainant himself has filed an affidavit stating that the complaint lodged is false and incorrect. It is also stated that in the complaint by the complainant that with the support of Maroti Hanwate, the complainant who had lodged the report about the incident, the statement of Maroti Hanwate is recorded by investigating agency and it is stated by Maroti that he has neither seen the incident nor 2 he has given the support to the complainant. The investigating agency has submitted that in the reply that in view of the statement given by the complainant and report lodged earlier and later statement given by the complainant and statement given by other witnesses in this regard to the non-applicant. The non- applicant is preparing to file a B-Final in Crime No. 3092/2010 before the competent authority. It is further stated that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, steps and proceedings, the non-applicant is going to consider the facts and circumstances and statement given by the witnesses and the complainant himself produced Notary affidavit. It is further stated that this is the reply of the non-applicant in the matter for appropriate order from this Court. Therefore, the non-applicant is not requiring custody of the present applicants. In view of the statement made by the Investigating Officer in the affidavit-in-reply, the application is allowed. Ad- interim protection granted is confirmed. The application stands disposed of as such. JUDGE *rrg.