{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4565 OF 2009 Pandharinath s/o Limbaji Ghule & others APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.P.R.Nangare, Advocate for applicants Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondent State Mr.Joydeep Chatterjee, Advocate for original complainant ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 19th January 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicants have approached this Court for their release on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.321/2009 registeered with Pathardi police station for an offence punishable u/s 307, 323, 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants followed by the submissions of learned APP, who is assisted by Mr.Chatterjee, learned counsel for first informant. {2} 3. It appears that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of one Rajendra Chaudhar in respect of an incident occurred on 28.11.2009 at about 12.30 p.m. Considering the disclosure of facts in the complaint, which is supported by the statements of two eye witnesses, who are neighbours, it prima facie appears that the applicants are involved in the offence of assault. In the premise, merely because the applicant No.1 is an aged person, it cannot be said that there is false implication. In view of the fact that the incident has occurred in a broad day light there cannot be said to be a mistaken identity to identify the applicants and the role played by them. In the premise, this is not a case of false implication. Considering the severe nature of acquisition against the applicants, no case is made out to use discretion u/s 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 4. In the result, the application, which is sans merits, stands rejected. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln4565-09 {3} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.100 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4565 OF 2009 Rajendra Mahadeo Chaudhar APPLICANT VERSUS Pandharinath s/o Limbaji Ghule & others RESPONDENTS ....... Mr.Joydeep Chatterjee, Advocate for applicants Mr.P.R.Nangare, Advocate for original accused Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 19th January 2010 PER COURT: 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. Issue notice to respondents. Mr.Nangare, learned counsel accepts notice for respondents No.1 and 2 and learned APP on behalf of respondent No.3. 2. By the present application, the applicant, who is the first informant, seeks permission to assist the APP to oppose the criminal application No.4565/2009. As there is no objection of the {4} learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 and learned APP to allow the present applicant to assist the APP, the present application is allowed. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln4565-09