{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2565 OF 2010 Hanmant s/o Kondiba Dakore APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Another RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. S.J.Salunke, Advocate for the applicant Mr. P.P.More, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 29th July 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present criminal application, the applicant has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with CR No.23/2010 registered with Mukhed police station for an offence punishable u/s 147, 148, 149, 436, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. It appears that interim protection is granted to the applicant by this Court vide order dated 9th July 2010. 3. Today, when the matter came up on board for final {2} hearing, heard learned counsel for the applicant followed by learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation carried out till today. 4. It appears that the said offence is registered on the basis of a complaint lodged by one Shobha Makode in respect of an incident dated 21.02.2010. It is alleged that 8 days prior to the said incident, some quarrel had taken place between the daughter one Vishvanath and son of the complainant on the count of fetching of water from common water tap. It is further alleged that due to the said dispute, the applicant and 7/8 others, armed with sticks, attacked on the sons of the sister of the complainant and thereafter, while leaving the spot, they had set the house of the complainant on fire due to which the food grains stored in the same were damaged and loss of Rs.30,000/- caused to the complainant. 5. During the course of submissions, it is brought to the notice of this Court that bare perusal of the complaint so also the statements of the witnesses, only disclose presence of the applicant and no overtact is attributed to him. It is also brought to my notice that on the day of the alleged incident, as the present applicant, as he is serving as a Head Master in a school situated at Degloor, was busy in conducting examinations of the students since 10.30 to 5.30 and hence there is no possibility of his coming to the spot of alleged incident and to participate in the same. {3} 6. Though the application is opposed by learned APP, yet he is unable to demonstrate any active participation of the applicant in the alleged incident. Apart from it, when the documents are brought on record indicating that the applicant was not present at all at the spot at the relevant time, no investigation is carried out to that effect as to whether the documents are genuine or not. In absence of any such report, it is hard to believe that the applicant was present and participated in the alleged incident. In the premise, case is made out to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail. 7. In the result, the application is allowed. The interim protection granted in favour of the applicant on 9th July 2010 is hereby confirmed and to remain in force till filing of the charge sheet. The applicant is directed to cooperate the investigating agency. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/B10/criapln2565-10