1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3675 OF 2009 1. Balaji S/o.Prakash Aglawe, Age-20 years, Occu-Education, R/o.Ahmedpur, Tq. Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur 2. Raheem S/o.Azam Shaikh, Age-19 years, Occu-Education, Ahmedpur, Tq. Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Smt.S.S.Jadhav, with Mr.T.J.Poul, learned counsel for the applicants. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for respondent State (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 17/11/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants are seeking bail in CR No.171/2009 registered in Ahmadpur Police Station, Dist. Latur, for an offence punishable u/s.395, 397, 307, 147, 148, 149, 109, 427 of IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel Smt.S.S.Jadhav appearing for 2 applicants, followed by the arguments of learned APP appearing for State. As the notice of this application is already served on the prosecution, the papers of investigation till carried out were placed before me for my perusal. 3. Considering the submissions across the bar, it appears that and it is a matter of record that two offences were registered in Ahmedpur Police Station. CR No.171/2009 was registered in Ahmedpur Police Station on the basis of complaint lodged by the father of Wasim i.e. the crime in which the applicants are seeking bail. This alleged incident took place on 12/09/2009, at about 1.30 p.m. in the residential premises of the father of injured Wasim and the complaint was lodged by one Habib, the father of Wasim. It further appears that on the same date, an offence was registered vide CR No.172/2009 on the complaint lodged by the present applicant no.1 against the said Wasim and others, which incident took place on the same day, but at about 12.30 noon in Shivaji Chowk. During the course of arguments across the bar, my attention is drawn towards the un-numbered last paragraph of the complaint in which these accused/applicant were arrested. Their find a reference about the earlier quarrel took place between these applicants and their associates and the son of the complainant in CR No.171/2009 and if it is so, these complaints to be treated as counter complaints, even these offences are not taken place on one and same place. In the premise, whether any offence as allegedly projected in the complaint lodged in CR No.171/2009 is to be considered. Like the injured in 3 that offence, the present applicant was also admitted in the hospital. The medical certificates on record shows that injuries sustained by Wasim S/o. of the complainant in which the present application is moved, those injuries were received within 6 hours before the admission in the hospital. Like the injuries found on the person of these applicants were also noticed as sustained within 6 hours before the examination and admission in the hospital. The only difference between these two observations that the applicants in the present case was brought in the hospital by the police. As against this, the son of the complainant in the offence in which the applicants are seeking bail was admitted himself in the hospital and not alongwith the Police Yadi which make difference for consideration whether the case of the applicants to be considered to enlarge them on bail or not. 4. While opposing the bail application, it is vehemently urged on behalf of the State that the statement of the eye witnesses recorded shows grevious injuries sustained by the son of the complainant and still he is taking treatment in the hospital. This Court is not in agreement with these submissions as the very first medical certificate produced by the State itself shows that the son of the complainant is admitted in the hospital at his own without Police Yadi and the timing therein shows that it is after the offence was registered, The fact is clear that the Wasim was not referred about the injuries sustained to him in connection with the offence registered. At the same time, it is observed by the Medical Officer, who has examined the son of the complainant that the nature of 4 these injuries are simple in nature. Even if it was vehemently urged that the hammer was used to assault Wasim at the hands of these applicants and due to that assault still he is in the hospital, which submissions are not supported by the medical certificate. Perusal of the papers of investigation clearly indicate that even though the charge sheet is yet to be filed, the statements of the material witnesses are already recorded. At this juncture, it is required to be considered that the very incident of the quarrel took place at the instance of son of complainant in Crime No.171/2009. In the premise, the case is made out to enlarge the accused on bail by putting certain conditions on them. 1. The application is hereby allowed. 2. Both the accused be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each and on furnishing PR bond in the like amount. 3. After releasing on bail, the applicant accused to give attendance twice in a week on every Wednesday and Sunday in between 10 to 1.00 p.m. till filing of the charge sheet. 4. Applicants not to tamper with the prosecution’s witnesses. 5. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/NOV 2009/cri-appl-3675-09