1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.808 OF 2010 Sachin alias Sonu S/o.Balbirsing Jaiswal, Age-24 years, Occu-Business, R/o.T.P.S.Colony, Parali Vaijnath, Tal. Parali Vaijnath, Dist. Beed APPLICANT VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Assistant Police Inspector, Police Station Parali (City), Taluka : Parali Vaijnath, Dist. Beed 2. The Superintendent of Police, Beed RESPONDENTS Mr.Rajendra Deshmukh, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for respondents. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 09/03/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with CR No.64/2007 which FIR was registered on 18/04/2007, in which after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in the Court of J.M.F.C. Parali Vaijnath and the case is 2 numbered as RCC No.26/2009, wherein the applicant was shown as absconded. Hence the warrant came to be issued. When the applicant came to know about this warrant, he applied for anticipatory bail before the Trial Court i.e. Additional Sessions Judge, Ambejogai, but his application was rejected, hence the applicant is before this Court for his release. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, and learned APP for State. Perused the papers of investigation. On the specific query, when the offence was registered in the year 2007, in which charge sheet was filed on 03/01/2009, wherein the applicant was shown as absconded and charge sheet was filed under the provisions of Section 299 of The Cr.P.C. which require certain procedure to be followed as prescribed under Chapter (vi) of The Cr.P.C. What steps were taken before the present applicant was declared as absconded as he is permanent r/o. Parali Vaijnath and doing the business there, which fact require to be considered by this Court as whether in reality, the applicant was absconding since the date of registration of FIR or mere allegation is made in the charge sheet that applicant was absconding hence charge sheet was filed under provisions of section 299 of The Cr.P.C. In reply to the query of this court, it was informed by the learned APP that the record shows no any steps were taken while the applicant was declared as absconding accused. 3. Apart from it, now the next question for consideration is about the role attributed towards the present applicant. On perusal of the 3 charge sheet, the statement of police personnels as well as one independent witness that applicant was one of the person amongst other members of the assembly who were pelting stones at the time of alleged riot. These allegations are vague in nature and if it is so, in absence of any specific role attributed about the acts committed at the hands of present applicant, case is made out to release the applicant accused on bail u/s. 438 of The cr.P.C. Hence order. O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. In the event of arrest of applicant in connection with CR No. 64/2007, registered in Parali City Police Station or in connection with RCC No.26/2009, on the file of J.M.F.C. Parali, he be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.20,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. 3. It is made clear that this protection is temporarily granted for the period of 2 weeks, within which the applicant to apply for regular bail before the concerned court. 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly. 5. Parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/MAR 2010/cri.appl.808-10