1 1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1203 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1203 OF 2009 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1203 OF 2009 Manzoor Nazir Shaikh, .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr.Shirish Gupte, Sr.Advocate, with Ms Sharmila Kaushik, for the applicant. Mr.Y.S.Shinde, A.P.P., for the State. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 04.05.2009. DATED : 04.05.2009. DATED : 04.05.2009. P.C.: 1. Heard Mr.Gupte, learned senior counsel for the applicant, and Mr Shinde, learned A.P.P, for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.40 of 2008 of Cantonment Police Station, Pune, Dist-Pune. The said crime has been registered against the applicant for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 326,323, 504,427,452,457 r/w 34 of the IPC. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the present applicant with three others allegedly 2 2 2 assaulted the complainant by means of hammer, iron-rod etc. Insofar as the present applicant is concerned, though the complainant, the wife of the victim, does not attribute any overt act to the present applicant, the victim himself has stated that the applicant took out a small hammer from his pocket and assaulted him on his head, which caused him a bleeding injury and thereafter the other accused assaulted him with weapons in their hands. I have perused the medical certificates. They show that the complainant sustained 3 contusions and one laceration. All the injuries are described as "minor head injuries". It further appears that the complainant was not required to be admitted in the hospital. In view thereof, Mr Gupte, learned senior counsel for the applicant, submits that the provisions of section 326 of IPC cannot be stated to have been attracted in view of the nature of injuries sustained by the complainant. He further submitted that the complainant, who is also an eye-witness, has not attributed any overt act to the present applicant. In the circumstances, he submits, that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail. Mr Gupte also pointed out that the other three accused were arrested and released on bail within 8 days from the date of their arrest. Having regard to the nature 3 3 3 of allegations against the present applicant, so also the injury certificates and other medical papers, I am satisfied that custodial interrogation is not necessary. Hence, I pass the following order. . In the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties to make up the said amount subject to the conditions stipulated in sub-section (2) of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. Further, the applicant is directed to report to the concerned police station every Saturday between 6 pm and 7 pm for a period of 90 days from today or till filing of the chargedsheet, whichever is earlier. . While passing this order I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial Court shall deal with the case uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. . The application is disposed of. (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.) (D.B.Bhosale, J.)