1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.581 OF 2010 Nilesh Subhash Patil, Age-30 years, Occ-Business R/o Shahada, Dist-Nandurbar APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ........ Mr.P.P.Chavan, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondent State. Mr.P.C.Patel, Advocate for original complainant ........ [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE : 16th February 2010 PER COURT : 1. By this application the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.196/2009 registered with Shahada police station. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP, who is assisted by learned counsel for original complainant. 3. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the FIR was lodged on 13.11.2009 on the complaint of Nilesh Patil for an 2 offence punishable u/s 307, 323, 506 and 34 of the IPC. 4. It is not disputed that the applicant had moved an application for anticipatory bail on 29.12.2009 and the same was allowed and applicant was protected till 30.01.2010. At the time of granting anticipatory bail a condition was imposed to give attendance in Shahada police station. It appears that without surrendering before the trial court, applicant had filed application on 11.01.2010 and hence the same is rejected by the lower court. Learned counsel for applicant states that the applicant is ready to surrender before the lower court on 22.02.2010, as the same is a precondition to move for regular bail. The applicant has urged to direct the lower court to decide the regular bail application on the same day. This is a settled legal position that the applicant released on anticipatory bail, if surrenders after the period for which protection is granted and moves an application for regular bail then the same has to be decided on the same day in accordance with law. 5. In the result application is allowed. Applicant is directed to surrender before the lower court on 22.02.2010 till then the protection already granted to the applicant to continue. If the applicant moves any application the trial court to decide the same on the same day. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) drp/A10/criapln581-10 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.640 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.581 OF 2010 Nilesh Bharat Patil APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Another RESPONDENTS ........ Mr.P.C.Patel, Advocate for applicant Mr.P.P.Chavan, Advocate for respondent No.2 Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondent State. ........ [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE : 16th February 2010 PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. Issue notice to respondents. Learned APP and Mr.Chavan, learned counsel for respondent No.2 accept notice for respective respondents. 2. By this application, the applicant has prayed to allow him to intervene in the application and to permit him to assist the APP for opposing criminal application No.581/2010. Neither learned APP, nor learned counsel for respondent No.2 has objection to allow this application to the extent to permit the applicant to assist the 4 APP for opposing criminal application No.581/2010. In the premise application is allowed and applicant is permitted to assist the APP. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) drp/A10/criapln581-10