1 aba-189-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 189 of 2011. Milind Dinkar Bankar ..Applicant. versus State of Maharashtra ..Respondent. Mr. P.M. Pradhan i/by Sanjay S. Patil, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. J.P. Kharge, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : A.R.JOSHI, J. DATED : 7th March, 2011 P.C. :- 1. Heard rival arguments for some time on this application for anticipatory bail preferred by the applicant, apprehending his arrest in C.R. No. 14 of 2011 registered with Kopri Police station, Thane. Offences charged against the present applicant are punishable under sections 307, 386, 392 of I.P.C.and other offences of rioting and extortion. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in fact, 2 aba-189-11 during the relevant time of the alleged offence, he was admitted in Hospital, by name “Horizon” at Navpada, Thane and was under treatment for lacerated wound. Attention of this Court is drawn towards Discharge Summary, at page no.16 of the application, which shows that the date of admission of the injured was 3.2.2011 at 2.45 a.m. and date of discharge was 15.2.2011 at 8:00 p.m. 3. On perusal of the contents of the F.I.R. which is at page No.18 of the application, it is revealed that the offence registered and in which the applicant is apprehending his arrest, occurred at 2:00 a.m. on 3rd February,2011 and F.I.R. was lodged to Kopri Police Station at 8:30 a.m.on the same day. The timings mentioned in the said F.I.R.and in the said Discharge Summary negate the argument of the applicant that at the time of incident he was in hospital. 4. Secondly, it is argued on behalf of the applicant that he had registered a complaint with same Kopri Police Station at CR I-14/2011 and it was registered on the same date of incident i.e. on 3rd February, 2011 at 3:45 a.m. It is argued that complaint of the present applicant is in first point of time and the alleged injury caused to him near the waist is by way of fire arm and caused by some unknown persons. By pointing out this circumstance, it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the 3 aba-189-11 police have not investigated the case properly and it is a case in which applicant can be granted the relief of anticipatory bail. 5. Counter to the above argument, learned A.P.P. showed the investigation papers and submitted that the telephone call log is obtained by the Investigating Agency showing some conversation from the telephone of the applicant at the relevant time i.e. at about 1:40 a.m. on 3rd February, 2011. It is further submitted that investigation is going on and the offences charged against the applicant and co-accused are of serious nature. He submitted that five co-accused are already arrested and present applicant is remained to be arrested. It is further submitted on behalf of the State that the F.I.R. registered by the applicant is apparently an eye wash an attempt to negate the case against the applicant. It is also submitted that the injuries as mentioned in the Discharge Summary are not of serious nature and only a lacerated wound and for which apparently the applicant was kept under observation from 3.2.2011 till 15.2.2011. 6. All the same, considering the circumstances, as mentioned above and considering the stage of investigation, in the opinion of this Court, it is not a fit case in which relief by way of anticipatory bail can be granted. 4 aba-189-11 7. Hence, application stands dismissed and disposed of. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. (A.R. JOSHI, J.) LRS