1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 633 OF 2010 1 Santosh s/o Baliram Mahajan, age 41 years, occ. Service, 2 Kishor s/o Baburao Mankar, age 33 years, occ. Nil., Both r/o Raver, Tq. Raver, District Jalgaon ...Applicants VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Police Inspector, Police Station Raver, Tq. Raver Dist. Jalgaon ...Respondent ..... Shri V.P.Patil, advocate for the applicants Shri D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for the respondent ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 15th March, 2010 ORAL ORDER : 1 Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.P.P. for the respondent. 2 This is an application preferred by the applicants 2 requesting to relax the condition, of not entering into the limits of Raver town until the trial is over, imposed upon them while granting bail to them by this court on 19.9.2008 in Criminal Application No. 2986 of 2008. 3 An offence was registered against the applicants with Raver police station, District Jalgaon under C.R. No. 31 of 2008 under Sections 143, 147, 148, 341 and 302 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act, on the complaint of one Yunus Khan. Thereafter the applicants preferred Criminal Application No. 2986 of 2008 for grant of bail, which was allowed in respect of the applicants and the applicants were directed to be enlarged on bail on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each with one solvent surety each to the satisfaction of the Court of Sessions and on condition that they shall not enter into township of Raver until the trial is over. Accordingly, it is submitted that the applicants were released on bail. 4 It is the contention of the applicants that since the release on bail the applicants have adhered to the afore said condition and did not enter into the township of Raver so far. However, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the daughter of applicant no.1 has become of a marriageable age 3 and her marriage is to be fixed, and therefore, he needs to enter into the township of Raver to obtain and negotiate with the prospective proposals for her marriage. Learned counsel for the applicants further urged that engagement of marriage of applicant no.2 has taken place and the marriage is fixed in April, 2010, and therefore, he needs to enter into the township of Raver therefor. Hence, the applicants have preferred the present application for relaxation of said condition. 5 Learned A.P.P. opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that the police report discloses that the applicants have not entered into the township of Raver so far, but pointed out the apprehension posed that if the applicants are allowed to enter into the precincts of township of Raver, there is every possibility of tampering of the evidence and/or influencing the witnesses. Hence, the learned A.P.P. submitted that the present application be rejected. 6 Considering the rival submissions, since, as contended by learned A.P.P. that police have reported that the applicants have adhered to the condition of not entering into the township of Raver so far, it is apparent that the applicants have not committed any breach of the condition so far. Moreover, the reasons put forth by the applicants that marriage of daughter of 4 applicant no.1 is to be fixed as she has become of marriageable age and the engagement of applicant no.2 has taken place and her marriage is fixed in April, 2010, and therefore, both of them require to enter into the town Raver, and therefore, appears to be reasonable and bona fide. As such, the condition imposed upon the applicants while granting bail on 19.9.2008 in respect of not entering into the township of Raver is required to be modified and the condition that the applicants shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not influence the witnesses is required to be imposed upon them. However, it is pointed out that the earlier condition of not entering into the township of Raver has been imposed upon the applicants with certain view, and therefore, the said condition is required to be modified for the limited period only i.e. for six months to enable applicant no.1 to make efforts for the fixation of marriage of his daughter and also to enable applicant no.2 to get marry in April, 2010. 7 In the result, the present application is allowed partly and the condition imposed upon the applicants in Criminal Application No. 2986 of 2008 while granting bail to them on 19.9.2008 that, “applicants shall not enter into township of Raver until the trial is over” stands modified for a limited period and the said condition stands relaxed for a period of six months, but simultaneously, another condition stands imposed upon the 5 applicants that they shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence upon the witnesses during the said period of six months of relaxation of the above referred condition. 8 Criminal Application No. 633 of 2010 is disposed of accordingly. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) dbm/crap633.10