1appln-3258-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 3258 of 2010 Sunil Shivram Bhagat .. .. .. Applicant. versus The State of Maharashtra .. .. .. Respondent. Mr M. S. Mohite, i/by R.D. Suryawanshi for the Applicant. Mrs A. S. Pai, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM:- A.R. JOSHI, J. DATE :- 11TH AUGUST, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Heard rival submissions for some time on this bail application preferred by the applicant arrested in C.R.No.I-27/2010 registered with Badlapur Police Station, Ambernath, District Thane for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 324, 326, 427, 506 (2) and offences of rioting, armed with deadly weapons. 2. On the earlier date also some observations were made by 2appln-3258-10 this Court on 6.8.2010. That time, it was submitted on behalf of the applicant that investigation is already over. However, this was controverted by the learned A.P.P. Today, it is, again, submitted on behalf of the State that investigation is still continuing. 3. Allegations against the applicant are that in the procession of winning the election, there was certain altercation and hot exchange of words in front of the house of the complainant, when the election winning party members burst fire crackers. It was objected by the complainant. The applicant got enraged and started assaulting the complainant and his wife. Both were assaulted by means of a wooden log. In the F.I.R. it is mentioned that there was fracture caused to the hand of the complainant. So also, it is mentioned that his wife, Smt Lata, was assaulted on her head by means of a wooden log by the present applicant. Injury certificate is shown to the Court by the Investigating Officer. It is of the same date and which shows one C.L.W.and one fracture. Fracture is on the left parietal region of the head of the said woman. It is grievous injury and caused by hard and blunt object. It is specifically to be noted that the said injury is on the left parietal region and this is significant. 4. During the arguments, learned Advocate for the applicant 3appln-3258-10 submitted that there are cross cases, out of the same incident of assault, and there is an injury by means of a weapon like sword on the hand, almost cutting the tendons of the two fingers i.e. index finger and thumb of one party member belonging to the side of the complainant. It is observed that the present C.R. No.27/2010 is immediately lodged against the present applicant on 12.4.2010. Whereas on the next date, the counter C.R. No.28/2010 was lodged, not by the present applicant, but by someone else against the present complainant. Apparently, such dates in filing of such C.Rs are of much significance. Moreover, in the present C.R. No.27/2010 there is specific averment that during the said incident one relative of present applicant took one sword from somebody else and tried to assault the complainant on his head. The complainant tried to escape from the said assault. However, the sword hit one another boy who was from the side of the applicant. However, it is for the appreciation of evidence as to who has caused injury to that man, not to the present complainant and that is to be done at the time of trial. 5. So far as present bail application is concerned, considering the rivalries between the parties and considering the said episode taken in the same village out of the election procession, it would not be in the 4appln-3258-10 fitness of situation to grant bail to the present applicant when the investigation is still in progress. In the result, the following order:- ORDER: (a) Bail application is rejected. (d) Any observations made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. Application is disposed of in above terms. (A.R.JOSHI,J)