Satyashil S/O. Devidas Bhadre And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2562 OF 2017 Satyashil s/o Devidas Bhadre and others ... Applicants

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent .....

Mr. S.B.Ghatol Patil, advocate for the applicants Mr. K.N.Lokhande, A.P.P for respondent .....

CORAM : K.L.WADANE, J.

DATED : 8th JUNE, 2017 O R D E R :

Heard Mr. S.B.Ghatol Patil, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. K.N.Lokhande, learned A.P.P for respondent.

2.

The present application is filed by the applicants under the provisions of Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in connection with Crime No. 177 of 2017, registered at Parli City police station, Taluka Parli-Vaijnath, District

Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 326, 332, 333, 353 of the Indian Penal Code on 15.4.2017.

3.

The allegations against the present applicants and other persons are that on 14.4.2017 the complainant was on duty as there was procession at the eve of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Jayanti. After procession was over on 14.4.2017 at 00.20 hours near about 50-60 persons gathered at the spot of the incident. The Additional Superintendent of Police Mr. Vishal Hanand alighted from the vehicle. So also staff members of R.C.P. force got down from their respective vehicles. Some people gathered there and asked the police personnel why vehicles of D.J. were taken and detained in the police station and they started throwing stones towards police personnel. The complainant sustained grievous injury on his head. Other police personnel also sustained injuries over their person.

Additional Superintendent of Police Vishal Hanand also received injury in the incident of stone pelting.

4.

Mr. S.B.Ghatol Patil, learned counsel for the applicants states that the applicants being office bearers of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Jayanti Samiti they have been falsely implicated in the present crime.

5.

As against this, learned A.P.P. states that during investigation it was revealed that present applicants were involved in the present crime. Some of the applicants have been identified by the witnesses. The investigation is in progress.

6.

Looking to the allegations in the present crime, it appears that the applicants have no fear of even police and they pelted stones on the police personnel including high ranking police official, the Additional Superintendent of Police. 7.

On perusal of the facts, it reveals that if anticipatory bail is granted to such persons, wrong message will go in the society. Therefore, looking to the seriousness of the offence and the fact that there are allegations against the present applicants of obstructing police officers

and pelting stones on them, they are not entitled for anticipatory bail.

8.

Criminal Application is rejected.

(K.L.WADANE, J.) dbm/crap2562.17