JUDGMENT :

Prithviraj K. Chavan, J.

1. These five applications seeking intervention in application for anticipatory bail are filed by the victim in order to assist the prosecution in this case with relevant facts, before this Court.

2. The applicants herein have been booked under Sections 143, 147, 341, 326, 307 read with Section 149 of I.P.C. by Fatorda police station on 20.05.2019 at 15.50 hrs. at Borda, Margao, Goa.

3. Earlier, the anticipatory bail applications filed by the applicants before the Sessions court were withdrawn. The applicants thereafter preferred second applications for anticipatory bail filed before the Sessions Court, which were rejected.

4. Heard Mr. V. Amonkar, learned Counsel for the applicants and Mr. Aran Braz de Sa, learned Counsel for the intervenor.

5. Mr. Amonkar drew my attention to a judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sundeep Kumar Bafna Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr., (2014) 16 SCC 623) : [2014 ALL MR (Cri) 4113 (S.C.)]. My attention is drawn to para 32 of the judgment which reads thus:-

"32. The upshot of this analysis is that no vested right is granted to a complainant or informant or aggrieved party to directly conduct a prosecution. S