Vilas S/O Laxman Mandlik And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra

1 CriApln 6287/2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 6287 OF 2016

1) Vilas S/o Laxman Mandlik, Aged 32 Years, Occupation Labour, APPLICANTS

2) Laxman S/o Waman Mandlik, Aged 60 Years, Occupation Agriculture,

3) Waman S/o Laxman Mandlik, Aged 27 Years, Occupation Agriculture,

4) Sanjay S/o Shankar Ramkhambe, Aged 38 Years, Occupation Agriculture,

5) Ramesh S/o Paraji Rankhambe, Aged 32 Years, Occupation Agriculture,

6) Rekha W/o Vilas Mandlik, Aged 25 Years, Occupation Agriculture,

7) Kamal W/o Laxman Mandlik, Aged 55 Years, Occupation Agriculture,

8) Bandu S/o Shankar Rankhambe, Aged 55 Years, Occupation Agriculture,

9) Sitaram S/o Shankar Rankhambe, Aged 35 Years, Occupation agriculture,

10) Ganesh S/o Paraji Rankhambe, Aged 30 Years, Occupation Agriculture,

2 CriApln 6287/2016

11) Bharti W/o Waman Madlik, Aged 23 Years, Occupation Agriculture,

12) Mahandra W/o Raju Rankhambe, Aged 35 Years, Occupation Agriculture, All Resident of Aunda (N), District Hingoli V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Station Aundha Nagnath, District Hingoli RESPONDENT Mr. R.J. Nirmal, Advocate for the Applicants Mr. R.V. Dadalkar, A.P.P. for the Respondent - State CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.

DATE : 5th December, 2016 ORAL ORDER :

1.

Learned counsel for the applicants does not press the application in so far as applicant nos. 1 and 2 are concerned. He submitted that in so far as applicant nos. 3 to 12 in Crime No. 79 of 2016 registered at Aundha Nagnath, Taluka Aundha Nagnath, District Hingoli are concerned there is no specific role attributed against them in the offence. The allegations against them are of general nature. In so far as assault and removal of gold ring is concerned, the same is attributed to

3 CriApln 6287/2016 applicant nos. 1 and 2 only. It is, therefore, submitted that in view thereof, applicant nos. 3 to 12 be granted protection. 2.

Learned Add. Public Prosecutor opposed the application on the basis of police-papers. He submitted that considering the statements made in the first information report and as injuries were found to have been caused to the informant, the applicants are not entitled for protection. 3.

Perused the police papers. The First Information Report does not indicate any specific role attributed to applicant nos. 3 to 12, and allegations are of general in nature. Considering the fact that allegations of causing grievous hurt and removal of gold chain are against applicant nos. 1 and 2, other applicants are entitled for protection. 4.

In view of aforesaid, the following order is passed :-

O R D E R

I) Application filed by applicant no. 1 Vilas S/o Laxman Mandlik and applicant no. 2 Laxman S/o Waman Mandlik stands disposed of as withdrawn.

4 CriApln 6287/2016 ii) In the event of arrest of the applicant no. 3 to 12 with regard to Crime No. 79/2016, registered with Police Station Aundha Nagnath, Taluka Aundha Nagnath, District Hingoli, for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 452, 324, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, they shall be released on bail on each of them furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.15,000/- and one surety in the like amount. iii) The applicants No. 3 to 12 shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when directed by the Investigating Officer. iv) They shall not take any steps to influence the complainant. v) Application is disposed of accordingly.

( A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ) srm/05/12/16