ARUN EKNATH BHANDER Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is an employee of National Rayon Corporation at Mohone in Taluka Kalyan and against whom along with co-accused in all numbering 16, offences under C.R. Nos.349/97 and 350/97 on the complaint of the manager and the security officer, have been registered has filed this application for anticipatory bail. The incident is dated 25th October 1997 and the alleged offences are of 147, 148, 149, 452, 307, 504, 506 of IPC. The petitioner and the co-accused are workers and there was some dispute between the management and the workers that is how the rioting had taken place. The two accused who were named in the FIR were arrested and are in custody. The name of this petitioner transpired in the course of the investigation where the eye witnesses named him as one of the persons present there. No specific assault is attributed to him nor is he said to have wielded any weapons at the time of the incident. The grievance made on behalf of the prosecution by Ms.Kantharia is that from the date when his name transpired in this case he is not available for arrest or for interrogation.

(2.) It is true that some injuries seem to have been received be the Managing Director and the Manager who is one of the complainants. The rioting had taken place because of the dispute between the management and workers as regards the bonus demanded by the workers. Statements of other employees have been recorded to show the presence of the Petitioner there. However, the custodial interrogation would not be necessary in case of this petitioner. Involvement of this petitioner by three witnesses was read out by Ms.Kantharia. There are general allegations made against him and the custodial interrogation is not going to advance further the case of the prosecution. It is different that the petitioner will have to face the charges levelled against him but prima facie there is no material against him for the offence under Section 307 IPC. Even the charge of trespass is applied against the petitioner and the other accused who are working in the said company and, therefore, had a right to be in the premises of the company. In the circumstances, the bail could be granted to this petitioner by putting conditions of making himself available for interrogation.

(3.) Hence, this application is granted. In the event of his arrest in C.R. Nos.349 and 350 of Mohone Police Station in Kalyan Division, Dist. Thane, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the sum of Rs.10.000/- in each C.R. with one or two sureties and on the condition that he shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating officer for a period of one week daily and thereafter whenever required by the police pending the investigation and on the further condition that he shall not threaten the witnesses in which case his bail shall be liable to be cancelled.