1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3877 OF 2009 Amol S/o.Sahebrao Pardeshi and others APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Mr.V.J.Dixit, Learned Senior Counsel, for applicants. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for respondent/State (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 17/11/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants have approached this Court for their release on bail in connection with CR No.131/2009, registered in Shirdi Police Station of Ahmednagar District for an offence punishable u/s.307, 325 r/w.34 of IPC. 2. Heard learned senior counsel appearing for the applicants followed by the arguments of learned APP appearing for State. As the notice of this application was already given to the prosecution, papers of investigation till carried out are placed in my hand for my perusal. 3. Before adverting to submissions advanced across the bar, I have to take note of one fact that even though the offence was registered on 2 09/09/2009 against these applicants, the applicant no.4 was arrested in connection with this offence on 18/09/2009 and applicant no.1 to 3 were arrested on 04/10/2009. Still the investigation in this case is in progress and charge sheet is yet to be filed. 4. During the course of submissions across the bar, it was vehemently urged that the alleged incident of assault on the complainant Salim @ Papya Khaja Shaikh took place as per the contents in the complaint at about 8.00 a.m. on 07/09/2009 and the complaint in respect of this incident was lodged on 09/09/2009. On the basis of complaint of the complainant recorded in Jahangir Hospital, Pune, i.e. after about 48 hours after the occurrence of alleged incident. During the course of submissions. my attention is drawn towards the fact that the complainant herein is a extradited offender and was prohibited to enter in Ahmednagar and Aurangabad District vide order dated 31/08/2009. In violation of this order, he had entered in the area of Ahmednagar District and took quarrel with one person for which an offence was registered vide CR No.25/2009 on 07/09/2009 about the incident took place at about 10.30 a.m. The complaint in that case shows that the applicant was admitted in Sai Hospital by his brother Shaikh Khaja about the alleged incident occurred at about 11.00 a.m. which was reported in Shirdi Police Station at about 8.30 p.m. My attention is also drawn towards the complaint lodged by the wife of 4 th applicant which was registered vide CR No.127/2009 about the alleged incident of forceful entry of the complainant herein in the shop of applicant no.4 where certain gold ornaments were robbed by the complainant herein alongwith his associates. Then my attention is 3 drawn towards the complaint vide CR No. 128/2009. registered on 08/09/2009. By pointing out all these complaints and contents therein, it is tried to urge before this Court that in fact the complainant Salim @ Papya Khaja was initially treated in Sai Hospital from where he was shifted to Sasoon Hospital from where he has shifted to Jahangir Hospital in Pune, then no explanation is required about the delay caused in lodging the complaint and in the premise, considering that now the major part of investigation is over, and there is no overact attributed against applicants from the facts disclosed in the complaint, no recovery at the hands of applicants, hence they be released on bail. 5. The application is strongly opposed on behalf of the prosecution by learned APP. According to him, even though the complainant in this case is a extradited offender and in violation of the extradition order, he has entered in Ahmednagar District, that does not mean that free license is given to this applicant to attack anyone. It was also urged that the weapons used during the offence were recovered under the recovery panchnama from the applicants. The medical certificate issued by the competent authority shows the nature of the injuries as grevious injuries and lastly and most importantly according to him, the statement of eye witnesses were recorded, which discloses that the attack by the applicants was on the broad day light and as it is so and yet the investigation is in-complete and is in progress, if the applicants are released on bail, they will likely to interfere in the investigation which is still in progress. 6. Considering these submissions across the bar, and on perusal of 4 the papers of investigation till carried out, one fact is clear as have stated in one of the earlier paragraph supra that in this case the investigation is still in progress and charge sheet is yet to be filed. The alleged incident and the authenticity of this incident to be tested at least at this juncture on the basis of disclosure statements of the eye witnesses who have named and identified these applicants about the role played by them. The papers of investigation further discloses recovery of deadly weapons at the instance of these applicants, and lastly the incident occurred in broad day light. Even though the offence is registered u/s. 307 of the IPC, but considering the gravity and the way and nature of the offence, it will not be restricted to the punishment of period of 10 years, but can be extended to life imprisonment also. In the premise, considering the background of these applicants which is brought on record by prosecution at this stage, the Court is of the opinion that it is not desirable that the applicants be enlarged on bail. Hence order : Application Stands rejected. 7. At this juncture, at the request of learned senior counsel, leave granted to move this Court after filing of the charge sheet if they so desire. It is also made clear that the observations in this order are prima facie observation till the investigation carried out at this stage. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/NOV 2009/cri.appl.3877-09