IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRI.APPLICATION NO.3312 OF 2008

CRI.APPLICATION NO.3312 OF 2008

CRI.APPLICATION NO.3312 OF 2008

Ramesh G.Chavan, .. Applicant

Vs

State of Maharashtra, .. Respondent

Mr T.R.Patel, for the applicant.

Mr K.V.Saste, APP for the respondent.

WITH

CRI.APPLICATION NO.3259 OF 2008

CRI.APPLICATION NO.3259 OF 2008

CRI.APPLICATION NO.3259 OF 2008

Baburao Deorao Chavan .. Applicant

Vs

State of Maharashtra, .. Respondent

Mr A.P.Mundargi i/b Ms Bhakti Deshpande for the

applicant.

Mr K.V.Saste, APP for the respondent.

CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J.

CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J.

CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE,J.

DATE : 15/10/2008

DATE : 15/10/2008

DATE : 15/10/2008

PC:

PC:

PC:

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail

in C.R.No. 167 of 2008 of Solapur Taluka police

station, District-Solapur. The said crime has been

registered against the applicants under section 328

read with section 34 of IPC and section 65 (f) of

the Bombay Prohibition Act. It is on the

allegations that on 16.8.2008 an information was

received that the present applicants were in

possession of molasses and were preparing country-

liquor near the well of one Mr Sham Pardhi, within

the limits of village Bakshi Hipparga. On receiving

the information, the informant and the police party,

consisting of 17 constables, went at the spot and at

that time they saw the applicants, who were busy in

preparing country-liquor, and the moment the

applicants saw the police they fled from the scene

of offence. The police were not knowing the

applicants. It is the case of the prosecution that

the informant identified the applicants as the

persons who were busy in preparing country-liquor.

The police have not recorded the statement of the

informant. The applicant in criminal application

no.3259 of 2008 has taken a defence of alibi stating

that on the very same day he was in the hospital at

Pune. Though I am not impressed with the defence of

alibi, I am inclined to grant the anticipatory bail

to the applicants for the following reasons: that

the police have not recorded a statement of the

person who claims that he had identified the

applicants at the scene of offence and that the

land, where the activity of preparing the

country-liquor was in progress, does not belong to

either of the applicants. Mr

Saste, learned APP, on instructions,

submits that there is no other material on record to

connect the applicants with the alleged offence.

Hence,the following order.

3. In the event of their arrest, the applicants

to be enlarged on bail in the sum of Rs.35,000/-

each, with one or two sureties to make up the