Bombay High CourtABA/192/2017allowed

Nilesh Trymbay Sontakke And Others v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Hinganghat Dist. Wardha

2017-06-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 aba192.17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.192/2017 Nilesh Trambak Sontakke and others ..Vs..

State of Maharashtra, through Police Station Officer Hinganghat, Distt. Wardha - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri A.M. Jaltare, Adv. for the applicants.

Shri N.R. Patil, A.P.P. for the respondent / State. CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATE : 23.6.2017.

Heard.

The applicants, apprehending arrest in crime registered against them and some other accused for the offence punishable under Sections 326, 143, 144, 147, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, have sought pre-arrest bail.

The crime is registered against the applicants on the complaint of Amol Tapase. The facts on record show that there is some political rivalry because of elections of Zilla Parishad between the group of the applicants and the group of Amol Tapase and Sharad Sahare (who is shown as co-accused in the crime registered against the applicants) has lodged complaint against Amol Tapase and Sanjay Tapase and others. The applicant No.1 who is aged about 22 years claims to be a student, the applicant No.2 claims to be a Journalist and the applicant No.3 claims to be a Cultivator and the applicants have stated that they are

2 aba192.17 not involved in any other crime / offence. This Court has granted protection to the applicants by the order passed on 29th March, 2017 with condition that the applicants shall attend the investigating agency. The investigating agency has not complained that the applicants have not attended or have not co-operated with it. The non-applicant has not been able to show that the custody of the applicants is required for further investigation. In the above facts, the interim order passed by this Court on 29th March, 2017 is confirmed.

The application is allowed accordingly.

JUDGE Tambaskar.