1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4465 OF 2009 Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre ........Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ........Respondent. Mr. V.R. Manohar Sr. counsel a/w Mr. A.P. Mundargi Sr. counsel i/b Naveen Chomal & Sandesh More adv. for the Applicant. Mr. Mahesh R. Jethmalani Sr. counsel a/w. Mr. Prakash Naik, Edith Amendes Dey i/b. Mr. Priyal Sarda adv. for the original complainant. Mr. Y.M. Nakhwa APP Respondent- State. CORAM: A. P. DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 06th October, 2009. P.C.: 1. This is an application moved under section 438 of Cr.P.C. Seeking anticipatory bail in Crime No. 84/09 registered at Akkalkot south police station for offences punishable under sections 109, 143, 148, 188, 302, 307, 326 of IPC and under section 135 of B.P.Act and under section 125(1) (3) of Arms Act. 2. The present applicant is a Minister of State for Rural Development having been elected as a member of the Legislative Assembly on the ticket of Congress-I, a National Political Party. The applicant has won the election on last two occasions defeating one Sidramappa 2 Patil, a rival candidate representing a national political party by name BJP. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the applicant is a public spirited citizen and has been engaged in social and political acitivities at Solapur since long. The applicant is representing the concerned constituency since the year 1997 and in the past has held the portfolio of the Home Minister for State and presently as stated hereinabove he holds the portfolio of Rural Development Minister of the State. The present application has been filed in the wake of ensuing Legislative Assembly Election for which voting is scheduled to take place on 13-10-2009. The applicant is apprehending arrest in C.R. No. 84/09 for offences punishable and referred to hereinabove. 3. Perusal of the FIR which is filed by the elder brother of the deceased alleges that the present applicant had instigated the persons named in the FIR to commit the offences in question which took place in an incident on 26th September 2009 at about 6 p.m. when the rival candidate Sidramappa Patil along with his supporters had been to village Shegaon with a view to canvas his candidature at the election. The deceased and the first informant in the company of others, who are named in the FIR had gone to a temple of some Goddess in the same village and when they arrived at the hall near the temple, the first informant and other persons in his group were attacked by 28 assailants with the help of weapons. It is 3 also alleged in the FIR that one Baburao Patil and Prakash Patil had fired bullets from a pistal with a view to commit murder of Sidramappa Patil and other, workers belonging to BJP. The bullets are said to have been fired in the direction of the first informant and persons in his group. The assault has allegedly been caused by pistol, sword, sticks etc. On account of the said assault, the brother of the first informant has been stated to have suffered a bullet injury on his head and scummed to death. Various other persons from the group of the first informant suffered grievous hurt on account of use of weapons. The FIR makes a mention of the overt-act on the part of the individual assailants with the use of a given weapon. About five persons from the group of the first informant had suffered injuries. 4. The role assigned to the present applicant is that about eight days prior to the occurrence of the incident on 26-9-2009 the present applicant and his brother Shankar Mhetre had been to the village Shegaon and had held meeting of their supporters and in the said meeting the applicant has allegedly instigated his supporters. The said instigation was in the backdrop of contest between the present applicant and Sidramappa Patil, the rival candidate. The motive attributed to the applicant is to eliminate the opponent candidate. On 26-9-2009 when the rival candidate Sidramappa Patil had visited the village Shegaon along with some of his supporters, the 4 persons named at Serial nos. 1 to 28 in the FIR assaulted the persons from the group of Sidramappa Patil by using the weapons. In the said incident the brother of the first informant died of a head injury. 5. In the above set of facts, the learned Senior counsel for the applicant Mr. V.R. Manohar contended that the present applicant was allotted a ticket to contest the election, as a member of the Legislative Assembly by his party on 23-9-2009. Whereas the rival candidate Sidhramappa Patil was alloted ticket by BJP on 21-9-2009. Thus in his submission about eight days prior to 26-9-2009 there was no occasion for the present applicant to even conceive that there would be a contest between the applicant on the one hand and Sidramappa Patil the rival candidate on the other hand. It is hence submitted that it is most improbable that on 18th Sept. 2009 or thereabout the applicant would instigate his supporters for attack the rival candidate or persons from his group. 6. It is next submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and the applicant has never been in the past even accused of having committed any crime. It is emphatically contended that if and in case the present applicant is not granted anticipatory bail as prayed for, the applicant’s political career would be ruined in as much as the applicant would not be in a position to canvas at the election. Finally it is submitted that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by whatever 5 conditions are imposed by this court, while releasing the applicant on bail. The learned counsel for the applicant further contended that in the absence of any material being available, which goes to connect the applicant with the crime, the applicant should not be deprived of his liberty. 7. Per contra, the learned APP has taken me through various statements of witnesses recorded during the investigation conducted so far. I have also perused the post mortem report so also the report of the Chemical Analyzer to whom certain exhibits were sent for analysis. On Perusal of the material on record what has to be considered at this stage is as to whether is the material available sufficient enough to connect the applicant with the crime or otherwise. The reliability of material or the evidentiary value of the material cannot be considered at this stage. As the investigation is at a preliminary stage, I do not wish to even name the witnesses and do not propose to discuss the contents of those statements. Suffice it to state that some of the witnesses have revealed the fact that on 18-9-2009 the present applicant in the company of his brother and others had participated in the meeting and in the said meeting the applicant has allegedly instigated his supporters to commit the crime. True it is that liberty of an individual is important. How ever when individual right is pitted against the larger public interest the former must yeild to the later. A 6 thorough investigation of the serious and grave offence would be in furtherance of public interest. 8. Mr. Jethmalani appearing for the first informant points out that in the application moved before the Sessions Judge under section 438 of Cr.P.C. It is not even averred that the applicant did not instigate the commission of the crime. He further pointed out that if the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, having regard to the applicant’s position in the society, his release would cause hindrance in the investigation and the same would hamper smooth investigation. 9. Having regard to the fact that the accusations against the applicant are very serious in nature pertaining to the grave crime allegedly committed because of the political rivalry, I do not deem it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the present applicant. In the result, the application fails and is dismissed. Certified copy is expedited. (A. P. DESHPANDE, J.)