1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.248 OF 2010 Bunty S/o.Prabhakar Paikrao, Age­25 years, Occu­Private Job, R/o.Aurad (Jah.) Tq.Nilanga, Dist. Latur, Now R/o. Bangalore, (Karnataka) APPLICANT VERSUS State of Maharashtra Through P.S.O.Aurad (Shahajani) Tq.Nilanga, Dist. Latur RESPONDENT Mr.S.S.Kazi, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.B.J.Sonwane, learned APP for respondent State. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 04/02/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with CR No.3/2009, registered in Aurad Shahjani Police Station for the alleged offence punishable u/s. 307, 353, 332, 336, 435, 147, 148 and 149 of The IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP appearing for State. Also perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 2 3. Perusal of the papers of investigation indicate that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of Anant Mahipatrao, Assistant Sub Inspector of Police, attached to Aurad Shahajani Police Station about the alleged incident dated 07/01/2009 which took place during the precision of Dr.Babasaheb Ambedkar Festival by the organisers of the said festival and the members of the Republic Party of India. According to counsel for applicant, due to political rivalry, his name is arrayed as an accused in the said complaint by the concerned A.P.I. alongwith the others and no role is attributed towards him. As against this, it is brought to my notice that only the name of present applicant is appeared at Sr.No.15 in the complaint, but during the investigation, on the very next day, statement of witnesses were recorded on 08/01/2009, statement of one Bandu Haribhau Bhankoskar shows that during the mob attack on the public property, the present applicant has damaged his motor bike alongwith other 3 persons. Also statement of one Ahmed Bagwan discloses the role played by the present applicant about the damage of private property during the mob attack by the members of the Republican Party of India. Considering the statement of witnesses, it can not be said that the applicant is falsely implicated in the said offence, on the contrary, individual role played by the applicant discloses by these 2 witnesses and if it is so, no case for anticipatory bail, application sans any merit, stands rejected. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/FEB 2010/cri.appl.248­10