Partly allowed

Kakaso Kakasaheb Vishnu Ghadge and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 Feb 2017ABA/105/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge order adjudicates an anticipatory bail application filed by accused persons in a case involving political enmity and alleged assault. The court granted bail to accused Nos. 2 through 6 subject to specific conditions but rejected the application for accused No. 1 due to pending cases and the nature of the incident occurring inside the complainant's residence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed for accused Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 on specific conditions; application for anticipatory bail for accused No. 1 rejected.

Kakaso Kakasaheb Vishnu Ghadge and Ors. Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

1 / 5 10-ABA-105-17.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.105 OF 2017

¶4

Kakaso Vishnu Ghadge & Ors.

¶5

.... Applicants

¶6

versus

¶7

State of Maharashtra ... Respondent

¶8

Mr.D.D. Ranaware, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs.Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the State/Respondent.

¶9

CORAM : MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 03^rd FEBRUARY, 2017.

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

This application is moved for pre-arrest bail by the

¶12

applicants/accused. The applicants/accused are prosecuted for the offences punishable under section 452, 327, 143, 147, 149, 323 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code in C.R.No.259/16 of Vaduj Police Station. The offence is registered at the instance of Suman Dadaso Ghadge on 21/10/2016.

¶13

It is the case of complainant that the family of the complainant and family of the applicants/accused are facing

¶14

Nesarikar

¶15

2 / 5 10-ABA-105-17.odt

¶16

political enmity and they also had some dispute in respect of construction of the house. On 20/10/2016 the applicants/accused and other co-accused arrived in front of the house of the complainant and they started abusing them. The applicant/accused No.2 Ravikumar Ghadge entered into house and hold her hand the applicant/accused No.1 Kakaso Ghadge pushed her and thereafter other persons also arrived there with wooden sticks and they all assaulted her with kicks and fist blows. Thereafter other people came to help the complainant and she was saved. Thereafter she gave complaint.

¶17

The learned counsel for the applicants/accused submitted that it is a false case and they have not committed any offence and it is a false case filed by the complainant out of political rivalry. He submitted that a cross case was filed by the applicant/accused No.2 and the offence is registered on 20/10/2016 at C.R.No.258/16 with Vaduj Police Station. The learned counsel further submitted that the applicants/accused are innocent and they have not committed any offence.

Nesarikar

10-ABA-105-17.odt

3 / 5

The learned prosecutor opposed the bail. The learned prosecutor relied on injury certificate of complainant Suman Dadaso Ghadge. She further submitted that three C.R.s i.e. C.R.No.127/15 u/s 397 of the Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, C.R.No.63/15 u/s 504, 506 of the Scheduled Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and C.R.No.259/16 u/s 323, 504, 147 and 143 of the Indian Penal Code, were registered at Vaduj Police Station. She submitted that the incident had taken place in the house of the complainant and hence bail not to be granted.

¶22

Perused the FIR and cross complaint and so also injury certificate of the complainant and also the statements of the eyewitnesses. The injury certificate discloses that the complainant received only simple injury. However, the incident took place in the house of the complainant. It shows that the applicant/ accused were aggressive. However, there is political rivalry between both the groups and cross complaint is also filed by the

¶23

Nesarikar

¶24

4 / 5 10-ABA-105-17.odt

¶25

mother of the applicant/accused No.2. In view of this, I grant pre-arrest bail to the applicants/accused Nos.2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.

¶26

However, the case of applicant/accused No.1 is different as there are three criminal cases registered and pending against the applicant/accused No.1. Considering the submissions of the prosecutor and also the fact that the incident of assault had taken place in the house of the complainant, I reject the pre-arrest bail of applicant/accused No.1. Hence following order :

¶27

ORDER

¶28

(a) Application for anticipatory bail of applicant/accused No.1 Kakaso Vishnu Ghadge is rejected.

¶29

(b) Application for anticipatory bail of applicants/accused Nos.2, 3, 4 5, and 6 is allowed on the following terms and conditions:

¶30

(i) In the event of arrest, the applicants/accused Nos.2, 3, 4 5, and 6 shall be released on bail

¶31

Nesarikar

¶32

5 / 5 10-ABA-105-17.odt

¶33

upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each with one or two solvent sureties each in the like amount.

¶34

(ii) The applicants/accused shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer and attend the concerned police station on every Tuesday between 06.00 p.m. to 08.00 p.m.

¶35

(iii) The applicants/accused shall not tamper with the evidence or pressurize or threaten the complainant, her associates and her family members.

¶36

(iv) The applicants/accused shall not commit any criminal offence.

¶37

(v) In the event of breach of any of the conditions by the applicants/accused, the prosecution is at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail.

¶38

The application stands disposed of on above terms.

¶39

(MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶40

Nesarikar

Kakaso Kakasaheb Vishnu Ghadge and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kakaso Kakasaheb Vishnu Ghadge and Ors. 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

Diliprao Keshavrao Jadhav and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dhananjay Rambhau Aundhekar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anil @ Balraj Diwanji Mallav and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kashinath Kisan Deokate Vs the State of Maharashtra

Laxman Tukaram Nimbalkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yogiraj Vishwanath Murhe Vs the State of Maharashtra