1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 3524/2009 (Pankaj Bhuraji Chauhan and one .vs. State of Mah. ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's orders Mr. A.J. Thakkar, Advocate for Applicants. Mr. A.D. Sonak, APP for Respondent. CORAM : P.D. KODE, J. DATED : DECEMBER 14, 2009 Heard. The prayer for bail made by the applicant arrested on 1.11.2009 and since then in custody in connection with Crime No. 78/2009 of Police Station Kingaon Raja, district Buldana for commission of offence under Section 436 read with 34 of IPC in connection with an incident which had occurred in night in between 31.10.2009 and 1.11.2009 in which the applicants on the count of dispute regarding the payment of Soyabean seeds having set on fire the house of the complainant, is opposed by the learned APP on the counts of the investigation being in progress, the involvement of applicants for the offences alleged being borne out from the statement of eye witness one Geeta and there being likelihood of the accused pressurizing the witnesses and tampering the prosecution evidence as both the parties 2 hail from the same village. The same is counter-veiled by the learned counsel for the applicants on the count of the dispute between the parties being settled before Tantamukti Gaon Samiti, Pimparkhed Bz. on 29.11.2009, the character of the prosecution material does not reveal undoubtful involvement of applicants in an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The learned counsel has urged that the parties having settled the dispute inter se , the discretion deserves to be exercised in favour of grant of bail rather than denying the same which in turn may give rise in adding to fuel to the dispute in between the parties. Having regard to the character of prosecution material i.e. implication of the applicants rests upon the statement of sole eye witness Geeta and herself having not observed the act of the applicants setting fire to the house, her close relationship with the complainant and the material in terms not indicating the applicants/accused being involved for commission of offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, the prosecution having not disputed the statement of learned counsel for the applicants of the parties having settled the dispute in front of Tantamukti Gaon Samiti and the other apprehension expressed by the prosecution can be taken care of by imposing suitable conditions, the discretion deserves to be exercised in favour of grant of bail. The applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing a PR bond in a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one or more sureties to make up the like 3 amount and further subject to the applicants (i) attending the I.O. everyday in between 11 a.m. and 12 noon for first two weeks and thereafter every Monday until filing of the charge sheet, (ii) not entering within the precincts of the house of the complainant or his relatives or in their fields, (iii) not committing any offence while being on bail granted by this order and (iv) staying at the address mentioned in the application and not changing the same without prior permission of the Court. Application stands disposed of. Hamdast allowed. JUDGE halwai