(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Criminal Application No. 3360 of 2011 1. Santosh s/o. Harishchandra Imale, Age : 25 years, Occupation : Labour. 2. Rajesh s/o. Harishchandra Imale, Age : 22 years, Occupation : Labour. Both residing at Mandki, Taluka and District : Aurangabad. 3. Gulab s/o. Kisan Imale, Age : 55 years, Occupation : Labour. 4. Lahu s/o. Gulab Imale, Age : 24 years, Occupation : Labour. 5. Ankush s/o. Gulab Imale, Age : 22 years, Occupation : Labour. Applicant Nos.3 to 5 residing at Naregaon, Aurangabad, Taluka and District : Aurangabad. 6. Tarachand s/o. Kisan Imale, Age : 48 years, Occupation : Labour. (2) 7. Vijay s/o. Tarachand Imale, Age : 26 years, Occupation : Labour. Nos.6 and 7 residing at Mandki, .. Applicants Taluka and District : Aurangabad. (Original accused) versus The State of Maharashtra. .. Respondent. ....................... Mr. R.R. Imale, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. B.J. Sonawane, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent. ........................ CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATE : 17TH AUGUST 2011 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard learned respective Counsel for the parties. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant nos.1 to 7, seeking bail in connection with Crime No. I-98/2011, registered with Police Station, Chikalthana, Aurangabad, for the (3) offences punishable under Sections 307, 143, 147, 148, 324, 323, 504, 506, read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code. 3. It appears that the offence has been registered on the complaint lodged by the complainant, namely, Kalyan s/o. Sitaram Patthe, on 17-7-2011, in respect of occurrence of the incident on the same day. It appears from the contents of the complaint, that the applicant no.2 Rajesh assaulted on the head of Sitaram by means of axe, and applicant no.4 Lahu also assaulted on the head of brother of complainant, by name, Gokul, by means of axe. The injury certificate of Sitaram discloses that he has sustained head injury. Hence, apparently, there is prima facie incriminating evidence against applicant no.2 Rajesh and applicant no.4 Lahu. 4. The investigation papers were made available by the learned APP for the perusal purpose, and after perusal of the investigation papers and contents of the FIR, and also considering submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties, it appears that there are no serious allegations against applicant no. 1 Santosh, applicant no.3 Gulab, applicant no.5 Ankush, applicant no.6 Tarachand, and applicant no.7 Vijay. Hence, considering the position that the investigation is under progress, and all weapons including two axes were recovered during the (4) course of investigation, and also considering the prima facie evidence against applicant no.2 Rajesh and applicant no.4 Lahu, the bail application of the said applicants deserves to be rejected, whereas bail application of other applicants is required to be allowed. 5. In the result, present Criminal Application is partly allowed in respect of applicant no.1 Santosh, applicant no.3 Gulab, applicant no.5 Ankush, applicant no.6 Tarachand, and applicant no.7 Vijay, and it is directed that they be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/-, each, and surety in the like amount by each of them, on condition that they shall give attendance before the investigator as and when required and shall cooperate in the investigation, and also shall not influence upon prosecution witnesses and/or tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly. However, the present Criminal Application to the extent of applicant no.2 Rajesh and applicant no.4 Lahu stands rejected. Present Criminal Application stands disposed of accordingly. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE ) JUDGE bgp/ka3360