1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Application No.752 of 2010 [Sheikh Abdul Rauf son of Sk. Bhikan Vs. State of Mah.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. Amit Prasad, Adv., for the applicants. Mr. D.P. Thakre, APP for Respondent. Mr. S.U. Bhuyar, Adv., for assisting the prosecution. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI, J. DATE : 17th June, 2010. 1. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail. 2. The applicants have been named as accused in Crime No. 26/10 dated 24th March, 2010 registered with Police Station, Malkapur City, Distt. Buldana, for offences punishable under Sections 452 and 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 3. Complainant is the brother of victim Akilbi. 4. It has been alleged in the First Information Report that : On 23rd March, 2010 at about 9.30 a.m., while the informant and his sister Akilbi were in the house, all three accused persons entered the house. As Akilbi was in front, the accused persons enquired with her as to where was her 2 brother who had made complaints about their construction of road. On this, Akilbi asked the accused persons to go out of the house. Thereafter two accused persons, namely Kadir and Ayyub caught hold of the hands of Akilbi, and Abdul Rauf – Accused No.1 forcibly inserted in the mouth of Akilbi a bottle containing poison. Akilbi shouted for help and due to said call for help, Sk. Sayeed, Sk. Shakil, Sk. Budan and Sk. Ahemed Sk. Gulam Dastigir came there for her rescue, on which accused persons ran away. 5. Akilbi was immediately taken to Govt. hospital initially at Malkapur, and then to General Hospital, Buldana and thereafter the complaint was lodged. 6. Applicants’ anticipatory bail application was rejected by Sessions Court. 7. Present application was moved on 4th May, 2010, on which date, this Court granted ad interim bail. 8. Bail application has been opposed by learned APP who has tendered the case diary for perusal. 9. Complainant has also filed application for assisting the prosecution. 10. Heard both the sides and perused the case diary. 3 11. Bail is pressed, inter alia, on following grounds:- [a] Applicant No.1`is a practising lawyer and the applicant no.2 is a businessman trading in shoes. [b] Applicants have no concern, whatsoever, with any construction of road. [c] No injuries are found on the person of Akilbi. [d] There is enmity between the families. [e] The applicants have been falsely involved in the case, and considering their social status, they need protection. 12. It is seen that the prosecution has collected evidence in the form of statements of informant, Dying Declaration of Akilbi and eye- witnesses. 13. From the material which is now with the Investigating Officer, the applicants are seen to be involved in the commission of offence. 14. The story that there is enmity and previously a complaint was lodged by the accused persons against the informant does not, at this stage, extenuate the accused persons as to their involvement in the offence complained of. 15. Considering the fact that Akilbi was 4 administered poison and those who have done the said act are persons known to witnesses, and their involvement is shown from the Dying Declaration of Akilbi and statements of other witnesses, the applicants’ participation in the commission of offence is evident. 16. Prima facie, involvement of the applicants in the non-bailable offences under Sections 452 and 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code is apparent and obvious. 17. In this situation, the application for grant of anticipatory bail does not have any merit, and requires no consideration. 18. In the result, application is rejected. 19. Ad interim bail granted on 4th May, 2010 is cancelled. Judge |Hedau| 5