0912appln1675.10.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1675 of 2010 Shivdas Harishchandra Thakare and ors. and ors. ..vs.. State of Mah. ............................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................... Mr.M.P.Kariya, Adv. for the applicants. Smt.A.R.Taywade, A.P.P. for the respondent. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J. DATED : 9 th December, 2010. Heard Mr.Kariya, learned counsel for the applicant. By the present application, the applicants are seeking their enlargement on bail. Mr.Kariya, learned counsel for the applicants, submits that the report dated 28/4/2010 is outcome of an enmity between the parties. He further submits that there is a long standing enmity between the parties and the reports are also lodged against each others. Mr.Kaiya further submits that the complainant and his associates were the aggressor and applicants in exercise of their defence had left with no option but to resist themselves from the complainant and in that process injuries were caused. Mr.Kariya, in support of his submissions, invited my attention to the judgment of this court reported in 2006-EQ(BOPM)-O 265 (Maruti Balwant Salunkhe ..vs.. State of Mah.). He further submits that applicant no.2 is a lady of 45 years age. He further submits that the applicants are ready to abide by the conditions imposed upon them by this court if they are released on bail. 0912appln1675.10.odt 2 Per contra, learned Addl.Public Prosecutor has strongly opposed the application. Learned APP has filed her reply. She made available relevant material collected by the Investigating Agency. Learned APP further submits that there are statements recorded by the Investigating Agency indicating the active participation of these applicants in committing the crime. Learned APP invited my attention to the statement of one Asha wherein it is stated that applicant no.2 assaulted Nirvuti. She also referred to the medical certificate showing corresponding injury to victim Nirvuti. The record further reveals that the report lodged by Shankar gives details about the presence of the applicants and their role played in the attack. It is also not in dispute that the report is lodged prior in time i.e. at 22.25 hrs. on 27/4/2010. The learned APP further submitted that in the report lodged by Purushottam, a vague statement is made that the accused persons assaulted Harishchandra, whereas in the report lodged by Shankar he has given the details. Learned APP further submitted that in view of material collected by the Investigating Agency, it is more than sufficient to show that the applicants along with other accused were the aggressor. The learned APP further submitted that in view of the fact that there is a long standing enmity between the parties, there is an apprehension that if the applicants are released on bail they may hamper the investigation or presssurize the prosecution witnesses. Learned APP further submits that the offence is of serious in nature in which Vijay Bunde lost his life and one Nirvuti and Shankar received serious injuries. In view of the material placed before me, I am of the opinion that there is strong material against these 0912appln1675.10.odt 3 applicants. The apprehension expressed by the learned A.P.P. is justified. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, Judgment referred by Mr.Kariya is not applicable in the present case. In the result, the application is rejected. JUDGE chute