( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3956 OF 2010 Nitin Shripal Parcha APPLICANT R/o Ramnagar, Jalna. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT .... Mr. Joydeep Chatterji, advocate for the applicant. Mr. N.H. Borade, APP for the respondent/State. .... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 5th October, 2010] PER COURT : 1. By this application, the applicant seeks anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with crime No. 204/2009, registered at Sadar-bazar Police Station, Jalna for offence punishable under section 395 of the I.P. Code. 2. Heard learned advocate and learned A.P.P. 3. The incident of alleged road-robbery occurred in the ( 2 ) evening of 4th August, 2009. The informant, namely, Mahaveer Baradia and his brother by name Rupesh were riding on a Bajaj motorcycle with cash amount in a bag alongwith bill-book, etc. It is alleged that three (3) unknown persons came from behind on a black coloured Pulsor motorcycle. Those three (3) motorcyclists assaulted the informant and his brother by means of wooden stumps. Both of them had fallen down on the road in injured condition. The three (3) unknown miscreants (robbers) took away the bag containing cash amount of Rs. 2,50,250/- and other documents. Thereafter, injured informant was admitted in a private hospital. He gave F.I.R. In the same evening. 4. So far as the evidence against the applicant is concerned, there appears solitary version of Rupesh Boradia which shows that the three (3) unknown robbers were arrested by the police and their names were disclosed as Amin, Balaprasad and Akash as well as Sandeep. He vaguely states that he learnt lateron that those three (3) robbers were accompanied by one Vijaykumar alias Viju, Nitin i.e. the present applicant, Sunny and Vinit. There is absolutely no eye witness account to show that the applicant was amongst the group of the three (3) robbers. The only vague allegation that it was subsequently learnt that he was also one of the ( 3 ) accomplices of the robbers is of no much avail. It cannot be said that there is some material against the applicant so as to justify his arrest in connection with the alleged crime. It appears that chargesheet has been filed against the other three (3) accused who are said to be the robbers and were identified and the present applicant is shown as absconding accused against whom action is sought under section 299 of the Criminal Procedure Code and, therefore, he has filed the application for anticipatory bail. 5. Perusal of paragraph 2 (2) of Chapter-VI of the Criminal Manual would indicate that in such a case, the Magistrate is not supposed to take cognizance against the accused whose name is shown in column No.2 of the chargesheet. 6. The only material against the applicant is that of hearsay information. Considering this aspect, it may be stated that the applicant is likely to be arrested without any substantial reason. In this view of the matter, the application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail, in the event of his arrest, on furnishing bail bonds in sum of Rs. 20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) with one (1) surety bond, before the Arresting Officer and if ( 4 ) chargesheet is filed against him, then this order would come to an end. He shall attend the concerned Police Station on each Sunday between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., for consecutive four (4) Sundays and shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer. [V.R. KINGAONKAR] JUDGE NPJ/criapln3956-10