Dismissed

Ajit Eknath Bhagat v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC18 Jun 2019BA/475/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in criminal bail application rejected the applicant's plea for enlargement on bail, noting serious injuries to the complainant, pre-meditation, and antecedent offences committed while on bail, despite reliance on a Supreme Court decision favoring co-accused on bail.

What did the court decide?

The application for enlargement on bail was rejected; the intervention application was also disposed of.

Ajit Eknath Bhagat Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

ba.475.19.3.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 475 OF 2019

¶3

Ajit Eknath Bhagat ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶4

WITH

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 512 OF 2019 (APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION) IN CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 475 OF 2019

¶6

Nayan Bhagwan Bhagat ...Intervener/Complainant

¶7

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN :

¶8

Ajit Eknath Bhagat ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶9

Mr. Niranjan Mundargi I/b Mr. Rajiv Deokar for the Applicant

¶10

Mr. A. A. Palkar, A.P.P for the Respondent-State

¶11

None for the Intervener/Complainant in APPP/512/2019

¶12

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. TUESDAY, 18th JUNE 2019

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

1 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

1/4

SQ Pathan

ba.475.19.3.doc

2 By this application, the applicant seeks his enlargement on bail in connection with C.R. No. I-309 of 2018 registered with the Mumbra Police Station, Thane, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 307, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code; under Sections 2, 4 and 25 of the Arms Act and under Sections 37(1)(3) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.

¶19

3 Perused the papers. The incident is stated to have taken place on 7^th June 2018 at about 8:15 p.m. According to the complainant-Nayan Bhagat (injured), on 7^th June 2018, he and his friends were proceeding to the office of the applicant to settle a previous quarrel. According to the complainant, at around 8:15 p.m, suddenly the applicant came to the spot shouting loudly, with a sword in his hand. It is alleged that co-accused Nilesh Bhagat-the applicant's brother was armed with a pistol and that he and other 3-4 persons abused and threatened the complainant and his friends. The complainant has specifically stated that the applicant assaulted him with a sword on the left side of his head, as a result of which, he sustained an injury on his left ear. The injury certificate of the complainant is at page 57 of the application.

2/4

SQ Pathan

ba.475.19.3.doc

4 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it was a single injury caused to the complainant and that all co-accused have been enlarged on bail. Learned counsel also relied on the decision of the Apex

¶24

Court in Bhausaheb Nagu Dhavare vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.¹ .

¶25

5 There are eye-witnesses to the incident of assault by the applicant on the complainant. It appears to be a pre-meditated attack on the complainant. The injuries sustained by the complainant are serious. The applicant has one antecedent, which is registered with the Mumbra Police Station, Thane, being C.R. No. I-142 of 2018, for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 342, 324, 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The aforesaid offence has been committed whilst the applicant was on bail. The role of the applicant is different from the role ascribed to the other co-accused, who have been enlarged on bail. The possibility of the applicant tampering with the witnesses, also cannot be ruled out.

¶26

6 Considering the aforesaid, this is not a fit case to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the application is rejected.

¶27

1 2001 (5) Supreme 448

3/4

SQ Pathan

ba.475.19.3.doc

7 It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie, and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶32

8 In view of the above, intervention application being Criminal Application No. 512 of 2019 also stands disposed of.

¶33

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶34

4/4

¶35

SQ Pathan

Ajit Eknath Bhagat v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Eknath Bhagat 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ganesh Ravji Palekar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anis Wahid Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sagar Whavale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nitin Mahadu Shegaonkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shamim Ahamed Aminuddin Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bhavana Sreekumar Menon Vs the State of Maharashtra