Cri. Apln. 4739/2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4739/2010 Deepak Jagan Shirsath and another ...Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra and another ....Respondent. Mr. R.S. Shinde h/f Mr. N.L. Chaudhari, Advocate for applicant. Mr. T.S. Lodhe, A.P.P. for Respondents. CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE, J. Date : 16th December, 2010. PER COURT : 1 The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No. 258/2010, Dhule City Police Station, registered under Section 307 and 427 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the applicant and others. It is the case of the prosecution that on 11/11/2010 at about 7.30 p.m., the applicant and others assaulted the complainant with swords and caused him various injuries. At the same time, the applicant No.2 also made similar complaint little prior to registration of the present crime, stating that at about 7.15 certain persons including the complainant - injured Vishal, had assaulted him with gupti and caused injuries to him. It appears that on both sides there are injured persons. The cross complaints thus are justifiable. The question, is whether the applicants deserve anticipatory bail. Having read both the complainants and having regard to the fact that several persons sustained injuries due to use of the sharp edged Cri. Apln. 4739/2010 2 weapons, it is clear that there occurred a serious breach of peace at a public place at almost broad day light and yet the applicants are not arrested by the police. Some times, I suspect that the police purposely avoided arresting the culprits in order to allow them to make application after application for anticipatory bail. The applicant No.2 here is admittedly a social worker and elected Corporator of Dhule. In a case of this nature, the applicants do not deserve any protection of anticipatory bail. In fact, I think the police should have arrested them soon after the incident. 2 There is one more reason why the applicant No.2 does not deserve bail. He has annexed a copy of the complaint of this crimes as annexure A at page No.12. However, this copy does not show one of sentence which clearly implicate the applicant No.2 giving his overt act during the incident. The copy submitted with the application thus creates an impression that the applicant No.2 was not present when the incident took place. I think, the defective copy was presented to the Court with ulterior motive. ORDER The application stands rejected. (A.V. NIRGUDE, J) ts k/