Shimla @ Shmla Tadkya @ Narka Pawar And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra

-:(1):- FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

Court's or Judge's orders.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 172 OF 2015 SHIMLA @ SHMLA TADKYA @ NARKA PAWAR AND ANOTHER

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Jadhav Satej S. APP for Respondent: Mr. R. P. Phatke.

*** CORAM: T. V. NALAWADE, J.

DATED: 6th FEBRUARY, 2015.

PER COURT:

1.

This application is filed for bail. Both the sides are heard.

This Court has perused the papers of investigation, which include record of injury in respect of Kawaji Pawar and one Mudiraj Pawar.

2.

The crime is registered on the basis of report given by one Julmabai Pawar. Applicants are living in the vicinity of her husband. It appears that both the side of the complainant and the side of the applicants are involved in some illegal activities. They used to give promise of selling gold on price lower than market price

-:(2):- and the customers used to visit their place. The incident in question took place after visit of one such customer. The allegations are made that there was quarrel between two persons over sharing of the amount taken from the customer and the complainant tried to intervene in the incident. Due to intervention of the complainant, there are allegations that the applicants beat her and beating was also given to her husband and others. They had gone to the residential place of the applicants. 3.

The medical record show that injuries were caused to head portion. It appears that the record is not collected to show that there was grievous injury. The crime is registered for offence under section 307, 34 of IPC etc. The statement of Kawaji could not be recorded as he is not available and submissions show that he is wanted in one offence. On the last date, a direction was given to learned A.P.P. to make submissions about antecedents of the applicant. Learned A.P.P. submitted that there is no record of bad antecedent. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is behind bars since September, 2014. In view of the above circumstances, it is not desirable to keep the applicant behind bars till the disposal of the case.

-:(3):- 4.

In the result, the application is allowed. The applicants are to be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. of Rs.30,000/- with one solvent surety, by each of them. They are not to tamper with the prosecution witnesses. They are not to commit similar offence. [T. V. NALAWADE, J.] Dt.06/02/2015 ans/172