The High Court granted interim anticipatory bail to two applicants and confirmed bail for another, apprehending arrest in a cross-complaint assault case under the Indian Penal Code, directing cooperation with investigation.
Interim anticipatory bail granted; applicant no. 1 released on bail on furnishing Rs. 15,000 bond with one surety.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
crap3442.11
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3442 OF 2011
[Kalyan s/o Sitaram Pathe, Chhayabai w/o Kalyan Pathe and
Dhanabai w/o Sitaram Pathe vs State of Maharashtraand anr.]
_________________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office |
Memoranda of Coram, |
appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders
orders or |
directions and |
Registrar's orders |
Shri K.E.Shinde, advocate for the applicants
Shri D.R.Korde, A.P.P. for respondents
CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J.
DATED : 20th August, 2011.
PER COURT :-
1 Heard respective learned counsel for the parties, as well as perused the investigation papers which are made available for the inspection purpose.
2 This is an application preferred by applicant nos. 1 to 3 seeking anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest under C.R. No. I-99 of 2011, registered at Chikalthana police station, Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3 It appears that the offence has been registered
2
crap3442.11
against the applicants on 17.7.2011 in respect of alleged incident occurred on the same day at about 9.00 a.m. It also appears that applicant no.1 Kalyan Patthe also filed complaint against Meenabai Santosh Imale under C.R. No. I-98 of 2011 at the said police station on same day i.e. 17.7.2011 at 9.00 a.m. Hence, there appear to be cross complaints against each other.
4 On perusal of the contents of the first information report, it appears that Harishchandra was assaulted on his head by Kannahyalal Patthe by iron rod and other assailants assaulted him by fist blows and leg kicks. It also appears that during the said occurrence of the incident of assault, complainant Meenabai, who was allegedly pregnant, was also assaulted by fist blows and leg kicks. Apparently, the role attributed to the applicants herein during the occurrence of the said incident of assault is that applicant no.1 Kalyan allegedly gave abuses and threats to kill Harischandra and applicant no.1 Kalyan as well as appellant nos. 2 and 3 i.e. Chhayabai Kalyan Patthe and Dhanabai Sitaram Patthe assaulted her by fist blows and leg kicks and not beyond that. Thus, apparently there are no allegations against the applicants to show that they used any dangerous weapons in the occurrence of the incident and assaulted the victim on the vital part of the body. Hence, it appears that the role ascribed to the applicants during the occurrence of the incident is not serious.
3
crap3442.11
5 Besides, there is cross complaint bearing C.R. No. I-98 of 2011 lodged by applicant no.1 Kalyan against the complainant party herein on the same day i.e. 17.7.2011, for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, and hence, it appears that the incident occurred due to the rivalry between two groups.
6 On perusal of the investigation papers, it is seen that the injury certificate of Harischandra was not made available for the perusal. Accordingly, learned counsel for the applicants stated that injured Harischandra has also been discharged from the hospital.
7 Having the comprehensive view of the matter, interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant nos. 2 and 3 deserves to be confirmed and applicant no.1 is entitled for grant of interim anticipatory bail.
8 In the result, present application is allowed and interim anticipatory bail granted to applicant nos.2 and 3 stands confirmed, with direction that they shall give attendance before the concerned investigator, as and when required, till filing of charge sheet and shall cooperate in the investigation.
9 Moreover, the application in respect of
crap3442.11
4
applicant no.1 is allowed and it is directed that in the event of arrest of applicant no.1 under C.R. No. I-99 of 2011, registered at Chikalthana police station, Aurangabad, he shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount, on the condition that he shall give attendance before the concerned investigator, as and when required, till filing of charge sheet and shall cooperate in the investigation.
10 Applicant nos. 1 to 3 shall not influence upon the witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence, directly or indirectly, in any manner whatsoever.
11 The above observations are prima facie observations and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits.
(SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE.
dbm/crap3442.11
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicants are entitled to interim anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in a case arising from a cross-complaint inquiry involving alleged assault.
Whether conditions should be imposed upon the applicants while granting interim anticipatory bail.
Whether the applicant no. 1 should be granted interim bail upon furnishing a personal bond with surety.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Kalyan s/o Sitaram Pathe
Chhayabai w/o Kalyan Pathe
Dhanabai w/o Sitaram Pathe
Kalyan Pathe
State of Maharashtra
SHRIHARI P. DAVARE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court