1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3030 OF 2010 1 Anantrao s/o Purushottam Deshpande 2 Vikas s/o Kishanrao Shete 3 Pradunya s/o Prabhakar Deshpande 4 Maroti s/o Tukaram Mohite Applicants VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. S.S.Rathi, advocate for the applicants. Mr. K.S.Patil, A.P.P. for the Respondent. CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 18 th August, 2010. P.C.: 1 By the present application, the applicants have approached this Court for their release on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.46/10, registered in Tadkalas Police Station, Taluka Purna, District Parbhani, for the alleged offences under Sections 143, 506 of the Indian Penal Code 2 read with Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 3 and 25 of the Arms Act. 2 The record shows that interim protection was granted to these applicants on 30th July, 2010 when the application was moved for the first time. 3 Today, when the application came up for final hearing, heard Counsel for the applicants and learned A.P.P. for the State. Also perused the papers of investigation, which record is made available to this Court at the time of hearing of this application. 4 It appears that said offence came to be registered on the complaint of one Nivrutti Naroji Kasture on 20.07.2010 at about 10.00 a.m. This complaint is about the alleged incident dated 19th July 2010, which took place as per the complaint in two parts. The first part took place at 5.00 p.m., while the second part took place in the intervening night of 19th July and 20th July. The bare perusal of 3 the complaint do not show any participation of applicants no.1, 3 and 4 in the alleged incident took place at 5.00 p.m. So far as the incident, which occurred in the intervening night of 19th and 20th July, admittedly, as per the facts disclosed in the complaint, the complainant was inside the house. On hearing different voices of number of people, who allegedly assembled outside his house, he heard that he was abused on his caste by the 2nd applicant to this application. Considering the fact, even though the first part took place at 5.00 p.m. on that day, while the second part took place in the midnight, there is gap of more than seven hours between these two incidents, but the alleged incident took place at 5.00 p.m., was not immediately reported in the police station. 5 During the course of submissions across the bar, it is contended on behalf of the applicants, that from the recitals in the complaint, except demonstrating that there was political rivalry between the two groups and the elections of Gram Panchayat were scheduled on 30th July 2010, it appears from the incident took place in the first part that due to political rivalry and the election is 4 scheduled, the second part is incorporated in the complaint. 6 During the course of submissions across the bar, the learned A.P.P. has drawn my attention towards the statement of Bhagwant Deshpande recorded during the investigation, who is projected as an eye witness to the alleged incident took place in the intervening night. Perusal of the statement of this Bhagwant Deshpande no where discloses that he is the neighbour of the complainant. If it is presumed that as threats were given to the complainant about assault at his residence, then if this Bhagwant Deshpande reached to save the complainant, it is but natural that he will not go alone but he will reach at the residence of the complainant with some of his party members to save life of the complainant. From the statement of Bhagwant Deshpande, his presence at 1.00 a.m., near the residence of complainant, appeared to be doubtful. The overall effect is that the statement of this Bhagwant Deshpande cannot be accepted as gospel truth, who has witnessed the alleged incident. From the complaint, complainant was inside his house and not knows who has exactly abused him on his caste. 5 6 Considering this aspect, a case is made out to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest. In view of this, application deserve the following order: ORDER (a) Criminal Application is allowed. (b) Interim protection granted on 30th July, 2010 is hereby extended till filing of the charge sheet. (c) Within meantime, if required, the applicants to give attendance to Tadkalas Police Station on written intimation in advance by the Investigation Officer concerned. (d) Application stands disposed of accordingly. ( A.V.POTDAR ) JUDGE adb/criapln303010