{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 886 OF 2010 1. Dr.Abdul Hafiz s/o Mohd Kashim Age-53 years, Occ-Service R/o Plot NO.6, Ravindranagar, Katkat Gate, Aurangabad 2. Munwar Ahmed s/o Naim Ahmed Age-35 years, Occ-Service R/o New S.T.Colony, Plot No.40, Katkat Gate, Aurangabad APPLICANTS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Commissioner of Police Aurangabad RESPONDENTS ....... Mrs.S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for applicants Mrs.Y.M.Kshirsagar, APP for respondent State Mr.I.G.Durani, Advocate for original complainant ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 8th March 2010 PER COURT: 1. By this application the applicants have prayed to release them on anticipatory bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No.46/2010 registered with City Chowk police {2} station, Aurangabad. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned APP, who is assisted by learned counsel for original complainant. Perused the papers of investigation so also the documents annexed with the application. 3. It is not disputed that both the applicants are in service with Maulana Azad College, Aurangabad. The documents annexed with the application indicate that there are two groups in the said institution. It appears that number of litigations are pending between the two rival groups in various courts including this Court. List of 25 pending cases is annexed with the application. So also the copies of orders passed in the application in second appeal No.83/2010 dated 10.02.201 and order dated 17.02.2010 passed in writ petition No.565/2010 are annexed. The documents annexed along with the application goes to show that there is rift between the two groups. It is urged that due to said rivalry there was likelihood of lodging of false complaint against the applicants and hence an application was moved by them before the Commissioner of police. This application requires to be considered in the light of these facts. 4. It appears that the said offence is registered on the complaint of Mirza Zakiullah Baig s/o Mirza Fasiullah Baig in respect of an incident dated 22.02.2010. It is alleged that the {3} applicants assaulted the complainant on the ground that wife of the complainant is not resigning from the post of Head Mistress. The complainant was taken to the hospital by the person who was accompanying with him. Certified copy of the medical certificate is shown to me, which shows that the complainant was examined in Ghati hospital and at that time it was noticed that the complainant has sustained CLW which might have caused by hard cutting object, however the nature of the injuries sustained by the complaint is described as simple. Accordingly, MLC was recorded. On perusal of the medical certificate it appears that the said certificate is issued before lodging of the compliant. Admission register is also produced along with the application. The said register shows that the complainant was examined at 11 a.m. which supports the fact that the complainant was taken to the Ghati hospital before lodging of the FIR. It has to bear in mind that in the complaint history of the alleged assault is given wherein it is stated that the complainant was assaulted by unknown persons. Apart from this, it has brought to my notice that from the wordings of the complaint, it appears that the complainant was taken to the Ghati hospital by one Wasim who was accompanying him, whereas the documents annexed with the application show that the complainant was taken to the hospital by his wife and hence it is urged to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail. 5. Learned APP opposed the application on the ground that still the complainant is under treatment and required to give {4} 25 stitches. 6. One fails to understands that why a false certificate is to be issued by the medical officer, who has initially examined the complainant at Ghati hospital. It is urged that after initial treatment in Ghati hospital, the complainant was shifted to private hospital. It has to bear in mind that if there were number of injuries on the person of the complainant then why the same were not noticed by the medical officer at Ghati hospital. On the contrary, the medical officer had described the injuries as simple in nature. The statements in the medical papers and admission register are different from the disclosure in the compliant, which creates doubt to infer that there is prima facie false implication. To release the accused on anticipatory bail is an exceptional extraordinary case, however this is a fit case where such discretion requires to be exercised. In the premise, case is made out to enlarge the applicants on interim bail. 6. In the result, the application is allowed. Both the applicants be released on bail in the event of their arrest in connection with CR No 46/2010 registered with City Chowk police station, Aurangabad on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each and on executing PR bonds in the like amount. The applicants to attend the concerned police station whenever required by the Investigation Officer on written requisition. The Commissioner of police to look into the representations and {5} complaints lodged by the family members of the present applicants and if required provide adequate security to the applicants and their family members. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln886-10 {6} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.962 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 886 OF 2010 Mirza Zakiullah Baig s/o Mirza Fasiullah Baig APPLICANT VERSUS Dr.Abdul Hafiz s/o Mohd Kasim & others RESPONDENTS ....... Mr. I.G.Durani, Advocate for applicant Mrs. S.S.Jadhav, Advocate for respondents No.1 & 2 Mrs. Yogita M.Kshirsagar, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 8th March 2010 PER COURT: 1. Heard. Issue notice. Learned counsel Mrs.Jadhav accepts notice for respondents No.1 and 2 and Learned APP for respondent No.3. 2. By this application the applicant, who is original complainant, has requested to allow him to assist the APP for opposing criminal application No.886/2010. In the premise, this application is allowed to the extent that the learned counsel for the {7} applicant is permitted to assist the APP. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln886-10