abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3900 OF 2007 1. Vinayak Gahininath Keche 2. Gopinath Gahininath Keche .. Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr.H.E. Palwe i/b Mr.S.S. Salunkhe for the applicants. Mr.K.V. Saste, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 17TH JANUARY 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. By this application under section 438 of the Cr.P.C., the applicants seek anticipatory bail in connection with an offence registered against them with Tembhurni Police Station under C.R. No.171/2007 punishable under sections 326, 504, 323 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. - 2 - 3. The prosecution case in short is that on 2nd November 2007, Mahendra Mahadeo Gaikwad (hereinafter referred to as "the complainant") filed FIR with the police that at about 12.30 noon on that day, the present applicants along with one Bapurao Changdeo Nikam and one unknown person stopped their motorcycle and assaulted him by questioning why the complainant did not vote for Baliram Gahininath Keche in the Taluka Panchayat elections. On the same day, cross complaint was lodged by Vinayak Gahininath Keche (the applicant no.1) that the complainant along with six other persons named in the complaint assaulted them. It thus appears that there are cross complaints, one by the complainant and another by the applicant no.1. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants produced for my inspection a copy of the medico legal certificate dated 3rd November 2007 issued by Snehal Fracture & Accident Hospital, Akluj. The certificate is taken on record and marked "X" for identification. The said certificate shows that the applicant no.1 received 4 injuries, one of which was grievous injury which is reported to have been caused on 2nd November 2007 between 12.00 and 1.30 noon. From the complaint of the complainant, which is at Exhibit-A to this application, the injuries on the person of the applicant no.1 cannot be explained because the complaint does not state about - 3 - any retaliation of fight by him but only states that the complainant was assaulted by the applicants along with 2 other persons. 5. While granting interim bail by order dated 7th December 2007, time was granted to the prosecution for instructions. Today, the learned A.P.P. states that despite the fact that I.O. was called for instructions, he has not given him any instructions nor is he present in Court today. 6. In view of the facts mentioned above, in my view, the applicants are entitled to conditional bail. Hence, I pass the following order:- ORDER ORDER ORDER In the event of the arrest of the applicants or any of them in connection with the crime bearing C.R. No.171/2007 registered with Tembhurni Police Station, each of the applicants shall be released on bail on executing personal bond of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15,000/- each subject to the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and attend the police station once a week on every Monday between 5.00 and 7.00 p.m. for a period - 4 - of 10 days and shall also attend the concerned police station as and when specifically summoned by the police. (b) The applicant shall not make any inducement nor give any threats to any of the prosecution witnesses and shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence. (c) This order shall come to an end on charge sheet being filed whereupon the applicant shall be entitled to apply for regular bail before the regular court, if so advised. If such application is made, it shall be considered on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations made in this order. . Application is disposed of. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)