Remanded

Dhanaji Dadaso Barkade and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC24 Apr 2019ABA/774/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay confirmed an interim order granting protection to applicant no.2 Shriniwas, who faced arrest. After examining the Report, the court found no evidence attributing the complainant's ankle injury solely to the applicant. The order mandates his appearance before the Investigating Officer until the charge-sheet is filed.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection order confirmed with direction to applicant no.2 to appear before the Investigating Officer on specified dates and as called till filing of charge-sheet.

Dhanaji Dadaso Barkade and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

ppn 1 8.aba-774.19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.774 OF 2019

¶4

Dhanaji Dadaso Barkade & Ors. .. Applicants Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶5

Mr.Rahul K. Dhaygude of the applicants. Ms.S.S. Kaushik, APP for respondent-State. Mr.M.R. Bambale, HC, Satara Taluka Police Station.

¶6

CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 24^th April 2019

¶7

P.C.:

¶8

. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned APP for

¶9

respondent-State. Perused the case diary.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicants does not press application for applicant nos.1 and 3 as pending this application, they are arrested. Record reveals that applicant no.2 Shriniwas was granted interim protection as he was to appear for his exam which was from 8^th April 2019 to 20^th April 2019.

¶11

Application is thus further considered with reference to applicant no.2 only. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that from

¶12

ppn 2 8.aba-774.19.doc

¶13

contents of report lodged by Sharada, only overt act attributed to applicant no.2 is of assault by him on left leg of Baburao who is complainant's husband by iron rod. Admittedly, Baburao had sustained simple injuries as revealed from injury report.

¶14

Learned APP had contended that apart from causing injuries to Baburao, applicant no.2 Shriniwas has also committed assault on complainant Sharada and to support this statement, has referred to one document in which he had assaulted complainant Sharada on her ankle. However, it is material to note that Sharada in her report, had not attributed any assault to her by applicant no.2 Shriniwas. In that view of the matter and though as per complainant's injury certificate, she is stated to have sustained blunt trauma on her ankle. In view of above contents of her report, there is nothing to hold that injury to her ankle is by applicant

¶15

no.2 Shriniwas alone more particularly, as according to report, complainant was assaulted by about 8 persons, out of which, 4 are unknown persons. In that view of the matter, interim order dated 29^th March 2019 is liable to be confirmed as per order below :-

¶16

ORDER

¶17

(i) Order dated 29^th March 2019 stands confirmed with further direction to applicant no.2 to attend Investigating Officer on 5^th May

¶18

ppn 3 8.aba-774.19.doc

¶19

2019 and 7^th May 2019 between 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 noon and thereafter

¶20

as and when called till filing of charge-sheet;

¶21

(ii) Application is disposed of in above terms.

¶22

P.N. DESHMUKH, J.

Dhanaji Dadaso Barkade and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanaji Dadaso Barkade 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ejaj Sattar Pathan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Siddheshwar Nagnath Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dhanaji Maruti Budnur Vs the State of Maharashtra

Janardhan@Amar Shivaji Mahadik Vs the State of Maharashtra

Tanaji Shivaji Rajiwade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Hrushikesh Vilas Dabhade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.