1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1397 OF 2010 Shri.Anandrao Ramchandra Pawar. ..Applicant. Vs. The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. Mr.U.R.Mankapure for the Applicant. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, APP. for the State. CORAM : R.S. MOHITE, J. DATE : 30th March, 2010 PC : 1 Matter is moved by praecipe dated 29.3.2010. This application was disposed off by me on 26.3.2010 after hearing both the parties. In my order, I have noted that I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. At the stage of passing of the order, the advocate for the applicant states that his client would like to withdraw the application and therefore, application is dismissed as withdrawn. 2 2 Now, it is contended in the praecipe that instructions to withdraw the application was wrongly given by the applicant under some misconception that inspite of withdrawal, he could approach the higher court. Taking into account the averments made in the praecipe, the order dated 26.3.2010 is withdrawn and the application is dealt with on merits. 3 It is seen that the applicant is shown as an accused in C.R.No.33/2010 registered by Islampur Police Station for alleged offences under Sections 143,147,147,323,324 and 506 of the I.P.C. Crime has been registered on the statement of an eye witness by name Sachin Falle. In the F.I.R. it is clearly stated that the present applicant Anandrao Pawar who is the Shivsena Corporator was present at the spot with a sword in his hand. It is also categorically mentioned that Anandrao Pawar used the said sword to assault the injured Abhijit Patil. It is mentioned that the sword hit Abhijit 3 Patil in his left elbow. The A.P.P. had shown me the injury certificate of Abhijit Patil and it discloses incised wound on the part of the body of the injured as mentioned in the F.I.R. Apart from this, there are three other witnesses. All three named the present applicant as the person armed with sword. It was sought to be contended that the present applicant was wrongly involved by his political rivals. This aspect of the matter cannot be considered at this stage. In the circumstances, application for anticipatory bail is dismissed on merits. ( R.S. MOHITE, J.)