1 Cr. Appln. no. 4217.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4217 OF 2009 1. Sunil S/o Rambhau Patil Age 30 years,Occup.Agriculture, R/o Shanimandal Ta. And District Nandurbar. 2. Bahiyya @ Chandrakant @Bharat Vitthal Patil, Age 26 years, Occup. Agriculture, R/o Tilali Ta.Nandurbar. ... Applicants V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. The Investigation Officer of Crime No. 184/2009 Nandurbar Taluka Police Station District Nandurbar. Copy for both the respondents to be served on P.P. In the High Court of Judicature of Bombay bench at Aurangabad ... Respondents ... Mr. C.R.Deshpande,Advocate for Applicants. Mr. N.R.Shaikh, A.P.P.for respondent-State. ... CORAM : A.V. POTDAR, J. DATED : 11TH DECEMBER, 2009 PER COURT 1] By the present application the applicants 2 Cr. Appln. no. 4217.09 have approached this court to enlarge them on bail in connection with Crime No 184 of 2009 registered in Nandurbar Police Station, for the offences punishable under section 302,120-B,143,147,323,506 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3(1)(X)(XI),3(2)(V) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe(Prevention of Attrocities )Act, 1989. 2] Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant followed by submissions of learned A.P.P. for the respondents-State. Also perused the papers of investigation till carried out. Considering the submissions across the bar, advanced on behalf of the parties by the learned counsel and learned A.P.P., it appears that offence came to be registered in Nandurbar Police Station, on the basis of complaint lodged by Dwarkabai Yeshwant Bhambre, about the incident occurred at about 7.00 P.M. On 28th October, 2009 and then First Information Report came to be registered immediately after occurrence of the said incident. It is alleged that, earlier, there was dispute between one Sanjay Rambhau Patil and 3 Cr. Appln. no. 4217.09 others, as they have purchased mutton from the shop of the husband of the complainant on credit and when the husband of the complainant demanded the payment against sale of that Mutton, this Sanjay Patil and his associates took quarrel with the husband of complainant and abused him on his Caste. Accordingly, the complaint was lodged by the husband of the complainant and an offence was registered against the applicants and others for the offences punishable under Schedule Castes and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Attrocities) Act, 1989, which is still pending in the Court of Law. On the alleged day of incident, in the evening when husband of the complainant had gone to recharge the sim-card of his Mobile. He was attacked by these applicants and other two infront of shop of one Dnyaneshwar Himmat Koli. Husband of the complainant was assaulted by giving fists and kick blows. The incident was informed to the complainant by one of the person. When complainant reached at the spot and tried to rescue her husband, these applicants and his associates kept her away and assaulted her, abused her on her 4 Cr. Appln. no. 4217.09 caste. When other persons gathered there and tried to rescue, after hearing hue and cry the applicants and others left the spot. When husband of complainant was taken to the hospital, he was declared dead. It is urged across the bar that this alleged incident took place on 28th October, 2009 and the applicant no.1 Sanjay came to be arrested on 30th October,2009, as well as the applicant No.2 Bahhiyya @ Chandrakant came to be arrested on 1st November,2009. Since then they are in custody. It is alleged that even though the investigation is incomplete, but the statements of material witnesses are recorded. No specific act attributed to these applicants was either mentioned in the complaint or mentioned in the statements of the witnesses recorded. There is no motive behind this incident on the part of these applicants. In the premise, applicants be released on bail. 3] The application is opposed by the learned A.P.P. for the respondent-State on the grounds that the investigation is still in progress. 5 Cr. Appln. no. 4217.09 4] Considering these submissions across the bar, initially perused the Post Mortem Notes of the autopsy conducted on the dead body of the deceased. It is opined by the Medical Officer, who has conducted autopsy on the dead body, that the probable cause of death of the deceased was “strangulation of testis”. Internal injuries which were found on the dead body is sign of the attack by more than one person. Apart from this, the medical evidence and the statements of the eye witnesses recorded during the course of investigation i.e. the person before whose shop the incident took place and other persons clearly indicate that these two applicants and others, though assaulted the deceased with fists and kick blows, after some time, on receipt of information, the complainant came there. When she tried to rescue her husband, she was also assaulted. The clothes on the person of the complainant also torned and assaulted the husband of the complainant. After the incident, husband of the complainant appeared to be calm and quiet, then they left the spot, which indicate not only 6 Cr. Appln. no. 4217.09 premeditating mind but they were come with specific intention to assault husband of the complainant. At the same time, there is abuse, not only to the complainant, but to her husband on their Castes. In this situation, before the completion of the investigation and filing of the charge sheet, if the applicants are enlarged on bail, there is likelihood of tampering the witnesses of prosecution. In the premise, the application being sans any merit, deserves rejection. Hence, following order. ORDER Application stands rejected. (A.V. POTDAR, J.) MTK/