( 1 )

aba796.20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 796 OF 2020

1.

Ashok S/o. Sampati Chaure,

...APPLICANTS

Age-22 years, Occu-Student

2.

Balasaheb S/o. Raghunath Chaure,

Age-57 years, Occu-Agril & Labour

3.

Ankush S/o. Ramrao Chaure,

Age-20 years, Occu-Student

4.

Mahipati S/o. Raghunath Chaure,

Age-46 years, Occu- Agril & Labour

All R/o. Tukuchiwadi, Tq. Kaij,

Dist. Beed

Mr. Sandeep D. Munde, Advocate for the applicants

Mr. S. Y. Mahajan, APP for the respondent/State

CORAM :

V. L. ACHLIYA, J.

DATE :

08-10-2020

P. C.

.

The applicants apprehending arrest in connection with

the Crime No. 321 of 2020 dated 24-08-2020, registered with Kaij

Police Station, Tq. Kaij, Dist. Beed for the offences punishable

under Sections 307, 326, 324, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34

of the Indian Penal Code have preferred this application seeking

pre-arrest bail.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned APP

( 2 )

aba796.20

representing the respondent/State and the counsel representing the

informant. Perused the police papers of investigation.

3.

In brief, it is the contention of the learned counsel for

the applicants that the applicants are falsely implicated in the case

at the instance of informant. The complaint has been lodged after

five days of the incident, after due deliberation to any how implicate

the applicants in a false case. It is pointed out that the incident

occurred on 19-08-2020 and till 24-08-2020, neither the informant

nor his relatives lodged complaint to police station. It is submitted

that the evidence relied by the informant of the injury sustained is

manipulated. In the FIR lodged no explanation has been put

forthwith as to delay in lodging complaint. Initially offence was

registered against the applicants under Sections 326, 323, 324,

504, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC. Later on offence under

Section 307 of the IPC has been added at the instance of informant.

By referring to overall facts of the case and the nature of injuries

alleged to have sustained, the learned counsel submits that neither

offence under Section 307 nor offence under Section 326 IPC made

out against applicant. None of the injuries can be levied as fatal or

grievous in nature to attract offence under Section 326 or 307 of

IPC. It is further submitted that the applicants are agriculturist by

profession. Custodial interrogation of the applicants is not required.

On the basis of false and frivolous complaint lodged by informant

the applicants may be arrested, humiliated and harassed for offence

committed on their part.

( 3 )

aba796.20

4.

On the other hand learned APP opposed the application

with contention that there is a strong prima-facie case to connect

the applicants with the offences registered. It is submitted that the

applicants and other injured were admitted in hospital and

therefore were not in a position to approach police and to lodge

complaint. After they recovered from the shock and able to make

statement the compliant has been lodged. By referring to overall

facts of the case learned APP submits that the applicant Nos. 1 and

3 only attributed specific role in commission of offence and alleged

that they had assaulted informant and one other injured by means

of knife. It is submitted that the Applicant Nos. 2 and 4 acting in

furtherance of common intention assaulted the informant and

Babasaheb by means of knife causing serious injury. The applicant

Nos. 2 and 4 assaulted the injured by means of fists and kicks

blows. It is further submitted that applicant Nos. 2 and 4 were

sharing the intention as of accused Nos. 1 and 3 who were armed

with weapons like knife and assaulted the informant and

Babasaheb. It is submitted that for the purpose of conducting

proper investigation and to recovery the weapons used in the

commission of offence the custodial interrogation of