IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 349 of 2010 Ramrao and anr v. State of Maharashtra ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr A.S. Mardikar, Adv for applicants Mr A.S. Fulzele, APP for State Coram : A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 5th March 2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant no.1 Ramrao is resident of village Rohna, within the jurisdiction of Police Station Dahihanda while applicant no. 2 is in military service, having his posting at Hyderabad. According to the complainant, alleged incident occurred on 25.11.2006. Initially, the police had recorded non-cognizable offence and directed the informant to approach the Court of Law with a private complaint. Thereafter the complainant wrote a letter to the Superintendent of Police making allegations against certain police officials. Complainant filed a private complaint before the JMFC, Akot who ordered enquiry under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. 2. In Criminal Application No. 876 of 2007, this Court by order dated 5th January 2010 quashed and set aside process issued against wife of present applicant no.1 by name Surekha (who was applicant no. 2 in the said application). Application in respect of applicant no. 1 Ramrao was allowed to be withdrawn. 3. Learned APP opposed application on the ground that earlier, the Additional Sessions Judge has rejected plea for bail made by the applicants by a reasoned order. 4. Considering the fact that the alleged incident had occurred long back in 2006 coupled with the fact that process issued against one of the accused has been quashed by this Court, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant no.2 since he is in military service and posted at Hyderabad. In case of applicant no.1 who is agriculturist, I think, he may be left to approach regular court with plea for bail on merit. Hence, the following order. 5. In the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No. 1/2007 registered with Police Station, Dahihanda for offence under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act read with Sections 323, 342, 294, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, applicant no.2 Gopal Ramrao wagh be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount provided further that he will cooperate with investigation and shall attend Investigating Officer as and when called. He will leave his fixed address with Investigating Officer together with telephone/cell phone number (if any) and shall inform change therein, if any, in future. After charge-sheet is filed, applicant no.2 shall surrender before the trial Court and obtain regular bail. In case of applicant no.1 Ramrao Balaji Wagh, he is permitted to surrender before the regular Court on or before 22nd March 2010. In the event he is arrested till 22nd March 2010, he be released on anticipatory bail on the same terms as are in the case of applicant no.2. If the applicant no.1 surrenders before the regular Court on or before 22nd March 2010 and applies for grant of regular bail, the Court concerned shall decide his application on its own merit. Interim protection granted in favour of applicant no.1 shall automatically cease to operate at the end of 22nd March 2010. Application stands disposed of accordingly. True copy of order be supplied to the Additional Public Prosecutor. Judge. Hsj