1 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1362 OF 2010 Sunil Shankar Meher and ors .. applicants -versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents. Mr. H. E. Palve, for the applicants. Mr S.S. Shitole, APP for the State CORAM: V. M. KANADE, J. DATED: 23rd March, 2010 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the applicant. He submits that the applicants have been arrested for the offences punishable under section l47, l48, 149, 225, 308, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged that one Jitu Meher assaulted the complainant with brick. In the complaint which was lodged, the names of the present applicants were not mentioned. It is clearly stated that about 5 to 6 persons were also present alongwith said Jitu Meher and have assaulted the other people from the complainant’s group. However, in the supplementary statement, the names of the present applicants have been mentioned. 2 2. The learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the applicants submitted that said Jitu Meher who assaulted the complainant with brick on his head was granted anticipatory bail by order dated 1.2.2007. He submitted that the Sessions Court had granted interim bail but had directed the applicants to report to the concerned police station on every Friday. He submitted that, however, on few occasions, the applicant did not report to the police station and therefore, their application was dismissed by the Sessions Court. 3. The learned counsel, appearing on behalf of applicants submits that in fact the applicants had attended the police station, but their presence was not recorded. It is, therefore, submitted that custodial interrogation of the applicants, is not necessary and they be released on bail, in the event of their arrest. 4. The learned APP, on the other hand submitted that the Session Court had granted anticipatory bail to the main assailant Jitu Meher, who is also injured in the said incident. He submitted that the Sessions Court had relied on the discharge card of the complainants as well as of the said Jitu Meher. 5. If that be so, the fact remains that the main assailant has been granted anticipatory bail and the names of the present applicants were not mentioned in the first statement and thereafter in the supplementary statements their names have been 3 mentioned by the complainant. Under these circumstances, therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicants is not necessary. The applicants be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.l40/2009 for the offence punishable under section l47, l48, l449, 225, 308, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered with Vasai Police Station. The applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station twice in a month till filing of the chargesheet and thereafter once in a month. ( V.M. KANADE, J.)