1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2749 of 2009 (Amodi Abu Bakar Bin Sayeed vs. State of Maharashtra and another) -------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Court’s or Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Judge’s or directions and Registrar’s orders Orders Mr. S.S.Ladda, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr. P.M.Shinde, APP for respondent State. ... CORAM: K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE:20/8/2009 ... P.C.: 1. The accused/applicant, a Municipal Corporator, seeks pre- arrest bail in Crime No. I-59/2009 registered at Jinsi Police Station, Aurangabad, for the offense under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307 of IPC. 2. The main plank of submission from the Counsel for the applicant is: the FIR is politically motivated, to malign reputation of the accused/applicant. It is a cooked up story in order to spoil his 2 political career. It is designedly activated. According to the Counsel, several documents annexed with the present petition, running from page nos. 36, 37, 38, 41, 45, 46 will indicate, at the material time, on 27.5.2009, at noon, he was in the State of Gujrat either at Surat or at other places and he did not participate in the so called incident occasioned at Hotel Yashodip, Jalna Road, at Aurangabad. The second limb of the submission was the role attributed to the applicant/accused being possessing a Gupti, inflicting injury at the nose of the complainant, is not so reflected in the injury certificate. 3. Learned A.P.P. points that the accused/applicant has at least 6 to 7 earlier cases of serious accusations. Counsel for the accused/applicant, on instructions, informs that in all such cases his client is acquitted or some of them are pending. 3 4. The defense of alibi as tried to be coined by the Counsel, is available at the trial and that too by way of suggestions to the witnesses and then proving the documents and even taking recourse to Section 313 of Cr.P.C. At this stage of the matter, where primary role of the accused is to be assessed, where discretion under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. is sought to be accelerated, these set of documents will not play pivotal role, to tilt the balance. 5. The certificates produced by the learned A.P.P. do demonstrate that the complainant suffered injury with a sharp weapon at his nose for which surgery was contemplated by expert in the field (E.N.T. surgeon). The allegations, as indicated above, are apart from Section 307 of IPC in terms illustrate ingredients of Section 149 of IPC. The Assembly of was of five persons as could be seen from the FIR. 6. Name of the 4 accused/applicant is reflected in the FIR of the complainant Mohd.Hanif Abdul Razzak Qureshi lodged immediately with the Police. Statements of the witnesses who were with the complainant and hotel employees, prima facie, implicate the accused. The incident being of 25.5.2009, the accused applicant could successfully keep himself away from the net of investigation, making it practically difficult to effect seizures. It may be that the accused/applicant has a political hold, to be a Corporator, but that does not mean, prima facie, he has a license to indulge in criminal activities. In the situation, no merit. Application rejected. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE ... agp/2749-09crapl ...