Court rejected the applicant's anticipatory bail application. The bench observed that while previously on bail for an assault, the applicant committed a fresh serious offence and absconded, demonstrating unsuitability for release.
Application for anticipatory bail rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
907.ABA1067_2014.doc
Vidya Amin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1067 OF 2014
Pradip Pandurang Mane … Applicant vs.
The State of Maharashtra … Respondent
Mr. Sachin B. Thorat, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for the State. I.O. Mr. M.S. Kumbhar, A.P.I., Sangola Police Station, Solapur.
CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 11th September, 2014.
P.C.
This Application is moved for anticipatory bail, as the
applicant/accused is prosecuted for the offences punishable under sections 307, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 341 of the Indian Penal Code, under section 4, 25 of the Indian Arms Act and under section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. One Sudhir Kashinath Bhosale has given the information of assault on him, pursuant to which an offence was registered at C.R. No. 68/2014 with Sangola Police Station, District Solapur on 19th March, 2014.
1 of 3
907.ABA1067_2014.doc
knife and so an offence was registered at C.R. No. 24/2014 for the offence punishable under section 326 of the Indian Penal. After the incident, the applicant was absconding and, therefore, the informant in this case helped the police to arrest the applicant/accused. Hence, the applicant/accused was angry with the informant. So, on 18th March, 2014 at around 6.30 p.m. when he was going on the motorcycle, the applicant/accused, his relatives and friends/coaccused stabbed him. The applicant/accused was holding sword and he told him that as the informant handed over him to the police, he wanted to kill him. The applicant assaulted the informant on his head. The coaccused also assaulted the informant by sickle and sword. When he and his injured friend started shouting for the help, some villagers arrived there and they tried to pull the informant and his friend under the bridge. Hence, the complaint.
applicant/accused was granted prearrest bail and when he was enjoying
2 of 3
907.ABA1067_2014.doc
his protection under the prearrest bail, he committed this offence. He is absconding since then. It shows that the applicant/accused has assaulted the informant constituting an offence under section 307 as alleged when he was protected under the prearrest bail in some other C.R. Hence, it is not a case to grant any protection to the applicant/accused. Hence, the Application for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)
3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail when the Court finds that while on previous bail, he committed a fresh offence and absconded.
Whether the applicant's history of absconding and assaulting the informant while on bail warrants rejection of anticipatory bail.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Pradip Pandurang Mane
The State of Maharashtra
Mridula Bhaskar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
