1 APPP 184-2011 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.184 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.5055 OF 2009 Sanjay Haribhau Patil .Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra .Respondent Mr.S.A.Ingawale, Advocate, for the Applicant Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP, for the Respondent  State WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.484 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra .Applicant V/s. Sanjay Haribhau Patil & ors .Respondents Mrs.M.R.Tidke, APP, for the Applicant  State Mr.S.A.Ingawale, Advocate, for the Respondents CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 14TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 P.C. . Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2. These are applications for relaxation of condition imposed upon the applicant restraining him from entering into Kagal 2 APPP 184-2011 Taluka & the State seeking cancellation of bail because the respondent-accused Sanjay and others are alleged to have committed breach of orders on which they were admitted to bail. They first failed to attend police station concerned on two occasions that is 10th & 12th April, 2010 and have also committed dacoity which has been registered as C.R.No.27 of 2010 after release on bail. It appears that after release on bail on 7th April, 2010, the party of the accused as well as complainant's party filed reports before the police station against each other alleging rioting and also robbery of Gold ornaments worth Rs.30,000/-. The report given by accused Sanjay's wife Seema is supported by statement of police constable and police head constable, who were on duty in the police station concerned. They state that the complainant's party approached at the house of accused Sanjay and caused damage by rioting. They had called for police help and thereafter, additional police force 3 APPP 184-2011 came to the spot. Considering the fact that after release on bail immediately complaint and cross complaint have been filed, therefore, there would be no question of relaxation of condition requiring the applicant to keep himself away from the jurisdiction of Kagal police station, since their presence would attract further complaints and cross complaint. 3. Criminal Application stands rejected. 4. Also justification given by the accused is proper. The question as to whether they had committed another offence would be required to be gone into by the Court where charge sheet in respect of the offence has already been filed. In view of this, application for cancellation of bail stands rejected. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)