Cri. Apln. No. 2513/2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2513 OF 2011 Nagnath s/o. Shivram Admile ....Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra ....Respondent. Mr. S.B. Talekar, Advocate for applicant. Mr. B.J. Sonawane, APP for State/respondent. CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATED : 5th July, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed for anticipatory bail in Cr. No. 70/2011 registered with Paranda Police Station, District Osmanabad for offences punishable under sections 326, 506 etc. of the Indian Penal Code. Papers of investigation were made available by APP. Both the sides are heard. 2. It was mainly submitted for the applicant that weapon is recovered and the applicant is teacher and his career will be affected if he is kept behind bar for few days. He also submitted that the real dispute is between sister of the accused and brother of the complainant. 3. The crime is registered on the basis of report given by one Siddeshwar Hiware. On 18.5.2011 when he was busy in making arrangements for the marriage of daughter of his brother Sunil and Cri. Apln. No. 2513/2011 2 when he was going towards tempo, according to him, the applicant came there and he gave blow of sword on his head. According to him, as his brother Arjun shouted, he turned back and due to that he could see that applicant was assaulting him and then he tried to hold the sword. He has contended that he sustained injuries to his two fingers and on head due to blow given by the applicant and applicant was under influence of liquor at that time. 4. The papers of investigation show that there was sutured wound on frontal aspect of scalp and there was incised wound with tenderness on three fingers. The second injury is described as grievous. 5. The advocate of the applicant relied on the case reported as (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases 694 [ Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra and others ]. In this case the Apex Court has made observations regarding the approach which needs to be adopted at the time of consideration of the anticipatory bail. There cannot be dispute regarding the propositions made by the Apex Court. Considering the allegations made in the present case that sword was used and blow was attempted at the head, this Court holds that discretionary power cannot be used in favour of the applicant. In such cases, custodial interrogation is also must. The message in respect of seriousness of incident needs to be given to like minded persons. So the application stands rejected. Cri. Apln. No. 2513/2011 3 Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. 6. The Advocate for the applicant requested that seven days time may be granted to the applicant to surrender. This request is also turned down. These prima facie observations will not come in the way of the Trial Court while deciding the case. [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] ssc/criapln2513.11