1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2151 of 2009 ( 1. Ku Yojana Solanke and another vs. State of Maharashtra) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr S A Mohta Adv. For applicants Mr Kothari APP for Respondent Coram: A.P. Bhangale, J. Dated : 21st July, 2009 Heard submissions at the Bar. By means of this application, the applicants are apprehending their arrest in respect of Crime No. 176/2009 reported under section 325, 394, 497 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code at Washim Police Station, on 26.5.2009, and prayed for grant of anticipatory bail on the ground that both the applicants are serving in Police Department with their Headquarters at Washim and allegations are made against them by first informant -Shyamsingh Rajbahadur Thakur against whom serious offences in the nature of theft and assault were reported at Malegaon Police Station in Washim District. The copy of the documents annexed with the anticipatory bail application, true copy certified by the Advocate and information received from Police Station Malegaon District Washim indicating more than five criminal cases reported against said Shri Shaymsingh Rajbahadur Thakur since the year 1999 till 2008. According to the applicants, they are serving in the Police Department and are innocent and facing accusations from a person who is a habitual offender indulging in serious offences like, theft, assault etc. 2 2. The applicants were also granted the benefit of interim anticipatory bail pursuant to the order dated 12th June 2009. The learned Advocate for the applicants contended that the applicants have already availed of the benefits of the said interim bail order. That being so, in the facts and circumstances disclosed and particularly when the fact that the first informant is a person whose conduct is questionable, and more so when a number of serious criminal cases are pending against him, I am inclined to confirm the interim bail granted in favour of the applicants on 12th June, 2009, subject to the same conditions mentioned therein, and dispose of this application. Interim bail is confirmed accordingly. Judge.