Allowed

Pratap Shashikant Desai v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC15 Dec 2017ABA/2181/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. Applicant apprehending arrest in case of assault with knife causing simple injuries. Bail granted on Rs. 25,000 bond with condition to report weekly.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one or more sureties in like amount and condition to report to police station on Sundays.

Pratap Shashikant Desai Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2017)

911 aba 2181.2017

1/4

Dusane

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2181 OF 2017

¶6

Pratap Shashikant Desai	....	Applicant
Vs .
The State of Maharashtra	....	Respondent

¶7

Mr. Abhijit B. Desai a/w Mr. Prasanna Bhangale for the Applicant. Mr. S.H. Yadav, APP for the State.

¶8

Mr. H.P. Kumbhar, PN, Juna Rajwada Police Station, Kolhapur/

¶9

Coram : Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav , J. Date : 15^th December, 2017

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1 Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation.

¶12

2 This is an application under Section 438 Code of Criminal

¶13

Procedure. The applicant herein is apprehending his arrest in Crime

¶14

No.374 of 2017, registered at Juna Rajwada Police Station, District Kolhapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 504, 506, 323 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶15

2/4 911 aba 2181.2017

¶16

Dusane

¶17

3 It is the case of the prosecution that on 20^th November,

¶18

2017, Yogesh Raghunath Khandekar was taken to C.P.R. Hospital, as he had sustained injuries. Upon enquiry, he had disclosed that on 19^th November 2017, he had been to attend the birthday celebration to his friend Amol Chavan. When he was returning home at about 8.30 pm., he was apprehended by Pratap Desai, Ganesh Patil and Mansing Powar, who had abused him on the ground that he had entered into their lane and thereafter the present applicant had assaulted him with a sharp edged knife, which was used for breaking coconuts. It is alleged that the associates of the present applicant had assaulted the complainant with bamboo.

¶19

4 Perused the papers of investigation. The injury certificates would show that the complainant had sustained contused lacerated wound on his forehead, which was simple in nature and a contusion on the shoulder, which was allegedly given by hard and blunt object

¶20

Dusane

¶21

3/4 911 aba 2181.2017

¶22

5 The learned counsel for the applicant submits that in

¶23

view of the injury certificates, it cannot be said that the applicant had committed an offence under Section 307 Indian Penal Code. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It appears that there was trifling quarrel between two groups. In the given facts of the case, the applicant deserves to be granted pre-arrest bail.

¶24

6 However, it is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are prima facie in nature. The learned Sessions Court shall not be influenced by the above observations at the time of hearing the application for discharge or quashing of FIR or at the time of trial. The same be decided on its own merits. Hence, the following order is passed :

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

1 The application is allowed.

¶27

2 In the event of arrest in Crime No.374 of 2017, registered at Juna Rajwada Police Station, District Kolhapur , the applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount.

911 aba 2181.2017

Dusane

4/4

3 The applicant shall report to Juna Rajwada police station on every Sunday between 10.30 am. to 1.00 pm. till filing of the charge-sheet.

¶32

The application is accordingly disposed of.

¶33

( Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav , J)

Pratap Shashikant Desai v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pratap Shashikant Desai 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

Amir @ Siftulen Taufiq Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nivrutti Dinkar Salavi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dhananjay Rajaram Dighe Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vilas Somnath Thorat and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Prashant @ Bala Madhav Mandekar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashok Pandit Shewale and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra