Partly allowed

Pralhad S/O Govind Panchal v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC18 Apr 2016APPLN/2174/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two criminal applications seeking regular bail, the Court allowed the withdrawal of one applicant's plea and granted bail to the remaining applicants charged under IPC sections 307, 353, and unlawful assembly offences, after finding the investigation complete.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed for all remaining applicants; Application No. 1983/2016 withdrawn for Applicant No. 1 with liberty to apply later.

Pralhad S/O Govind Panchal Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

criapln2174-1983-2016

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2174 OF 2016

¶5

Pralhad s/o Govind Panchal,
Age : 49 years, Occu. Labourer,
R/o Pangaon, Tq. Renapur,
District Latur APPLICANT

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

The State of Maharashtra,
through Police Inspector,
Police Station, Renapur,
Tq. Renapur, District LaturRESPONDENT

¶8

AND

¶9

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1983 OF 2016

¶10

1. Chetan Govindsing Chauhan, Age : 30 years, Occu. Agri. And Business, R/o Pangaon, Tq. Renapur, District Latur

¶11

2. Chandrakant Rangnathrao alias Raghunath Chavan, Age : 73 years, Occu. Agri., R/o Pangaon, Tq. Renapur, District Latur

¶12

3.Nagnath Chandrakant Chavan,
Age : 32 years, Occu. Agri.,
R/o Pangaon, Tq. Renapur,
District LaturAPPLICANTS
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra,
through Police Inspector,
Police Station, Renapur,
Tq. Renapur, District LaturRESPONDENT

¶13

Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate holding for Mr. Shailesh
S. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for the applicant in
Criminal Application No. 2174/2016

¶14

criapln2174-1983-2016

¶15

¶16

Mr. V.D. Salunke, Advocate holding for and with
Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate for the applicants
in Criminal Application No. 1983/2016
Mr. A.R. Borulkar, A.P.P. for the respondent-State
in both the applications

¶17

 CORAM: M.T. JOSHI, J.
 DATE : 18/04/2016

¶18

ORAL ORDER :

¶19

1. Heard both sides.

¶20

2. Both the present applications, for grant of regular bail to the applicants therein, have arisen out of Crime No. 43/2016, registered with Renapur Police

¶21

Station, Taluka Renapur, District Latur, for the
offences punishable under section 307, 353, 333, 147,
148, 149, 427, 323 of the Indian Penal Code and under
section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and under
section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property
Act and under section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

¶22

3.Upon hearing both sides, learned counsel for
the applicants in Criminal Application No. 1983/2016, on
instructions of applicant No.1, submits that said
applicant No. 1 – Chetan Govindsing Chauhan wishes to
withdraw the present application (Cri. Application No.

¶23

3 criapln2174-1983-2016

¶24

1983/2016) to his extent. However, liberty to file
similar application in the trial court after the
chargesheet is filed, may be granted.

¶25

4.So far as rest of the applicants in both the
applications are concerned, the allegations are that
they were members of the mob while one Dhananjay Chavan
has actually assaulted the police constable and some of

¶26

the members of the mob were having sticks and stones
with them.

¶27

5.Considering the fact that the present

¶28

applicants are arrested about two months back and
finding that the investigation qua them is practically
complete, both the applications are allowed to the
extent of the rest of the applicants. Hence, the
following order :-

¶29

6.Criminal Application No. 1983/2016 to the

¶30

extent of applicant No. 1 – Chetan Govindsing Chauhan is
allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file similar
application in the trial court after the chargesheet is
filed.

¶31

4 criapln2174-1983-2016

¶32

7.All the rest of the applicants in both the

¶33

applications be released on bail in Crime No. 43/2016,
registered with Renapur Police Station, Taluka Renapur,
District Latur, for the offences punishable under
section 307, 353, 333, 147, 148, 149, 427, 323 of the
Indian Penal Code and under section 7 of the Criminal
Law Amendment Act and under section 3 of the Prevention
of Damage to Public Property Act and under section 135
of the Bombay Police Act, on their executing P.R. bond
in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand)
each and also upon furnishing surety each in the like
amount. Their applications are allowed accordingly.

¶34

8.All the applicants shall attend the

¶35

investigating officer/concerned police station between
09.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m. on every second and fourth
Tuesday, for a period of four months from the date of
their release on bail.

¶36

9.Both the applications are disposed of.

¶37

npj/criapln2174-1983-2016

Pralhad S/O Govind Panchal v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pralhad S/O Govind Panchal v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raosaheb Vishwanath Tagad Vs the State of Maharashtra

Musakhan Vahedkhan Pathan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dipak S/O. Ambadas Gujrathi and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Meenabai Madhukar Patil Vs the Stae of Maharashtra

Tejaswini Kailasrao Waghmare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rohan Vilas Torne Vs the State of Maharashtra