1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 17/2011 ( Ishwar Kishan Janbandhu .vs. State of Maharashtra through PSO PS Desaiganj, Dist. Gadchiroli. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. A.M. Rizwy, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. D.P. Thakre, APP for Respondent. .......... CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 11, 2011 Heard. For the reasons recorded in the order dated 21.1.2011, the ad-interim direction in terms of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. was passed in favour of the applicant in connection with the arrest apprehended by him in Crime No. 1/2010 of Police Station Desaiganj for offence under Sections 306, 498-A of IPC. While giving the said direction, certain conditions were imposed to see that the progress of the investigation in the said crime is not hampered. Notice of the said application was served upon the prosecution and in response to the same the learned APP has filed the reply. After hearing both the sides and considering the matters stated in the reply and so also the case diary shown, it is difficult to perceive of there being any 2 reason for cancelling the said ad-interim direction in favour of the applicant. Though the learned APP tried to justify the necessity of custodial interrogation of the applicant on the count that burnt clothes of the deceased are yet to be recovered, prima facie it is difficult to see any merits in the same. The same is obvious as no such effort was apparently made on the date of the incident when spot panchanama and inquest panchanama were drawn. Needless to add that apart from the matters from the dying declaration referred in the order passed on 21.1.2011, even the material in the statement of witness Vilas Sangole is also in consonance with the matters stated in the said dying declaration. The learned APP has also not refuted the statement made by the learned counsel for the applicant of the applicant having abided the conditions imposed while passing the ad-interim direction. Having regard to the same, the ad-interim direction deserves to be confirmed after considering the case of the applicant in the light of the guidelines given by the Apex Court in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre .vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. reported in 2010 (12) SCALE 691 in paragraphs 122 to 125. However, at this stage the learned APP having sought the liberty to reapproach the Court for the purposes of cancellation of bail and/or for custodial interrogation as would be found necessary in the event of commission of any higher offence being revealed during the investigation in progress. The learned counsel for the applicant has not objected the said prayer. Apart from the same if further offence is revealed, then such a 3 liberty will be required to be given to enable the Police to complete the investigation of such aspect also. Hence with such a liberty to the prosecution, the ad- interim direction given on January 21, 2011 is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions except the modification that now the applicant will attend the Investigating Officer on every Monday in between 11 and 12 noon until filing of the charge sheet. In addition to the same, the applicant shall also attend the Investigating Officer in connection with the investigation if summoned by the Investigating Officer. The application stands disposed of. JUDGE halwai