1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4247 OF 2009 Shrimant S/o.Malhari Chaudhari APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and another RESPONDENTS Mrs.S.S.Jadhav, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.N.B.Patil, learned APP for respondents. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 10/12/2009 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for his release on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with CR No.120/2009 registered in Neknoor Police Station of Dist.Beed for an offence punishable u/s. 302, 323 r/w. 34 of 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. 3. From the papers of investigation, it appears that the said offence came to be registered on 21/09/2009 on the complaint of one 2 Shrikrushna Nivrutti Chaudhari, the son of the deceased namely Nivrutti Khanderao Chaudhari. It appears from the complaint that the incident occurred on 20/09/2009 in the field of the complainant where this applicant alongwith other came where the complainant and his father were present. The complainant was caught hold by the servant of this applicant and his father was caught hold by the present applicant. The other person by name Shivaji assaulted the father of complainant with fist blows on his chest. In that scuffle, father of the complainant collapsed from where he was taken to the hospital and in the hospital, father of the complainant was declared to be dead. The papers of investigation further discloses that while the incident was going on, this applicant prohibited the complainant and others to rescue his father to whom Shivaji gave fist blows, resulted in the death of father of the complainant. 4. It is urged across the bar that considering the role played by this applicant as well as demonstrated by the witnesses do not attribute to causing of death of father of the complainant, mere his presence will not be connected to the cause of death of father of the complainant, hence he be released on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest. 5. The application is opposed by the learned APP appearing for the State on the ground that if the movements of the complainant were not restricted by this applicant and others, he might have rescue his father from the clutches of Shivaji and his life might have 3 saved. In the premise, considering these circumstances against the applicant, no anticipatory bail to be granted to the applicant. 6. Perused the papers of investigation till carried out in the light of these submissions across the bar. Father of the complainant expired, this fact can not be disputed. At the same time, as the probable cause of death is appeared to be reserved in the post mortem notes as the viscera is forwarded for the chemical analysis. At the same time, it can not be denied that death caused to the to the father of the complainant due to the assault and at that time, the complainant was prohibited by the acts of this applicant and if it is so, this is not a case where the Court can use the discretion for releasing this applicant on anticipatory bail u/s. 438 of The Cr.P.C. Hence following order : Application sans any merit, hence rejected. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/DEC 2009/cri.appl.4247-09