Allowed

Amruta Alias Amruit Gulab Parhad v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC16 Dec 2020ABA/968/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed the anticipatory bail application of an accused in a violent land dispute case involving multiple IPC offences. The court granted bail subject to cooperation with investigation and attendance requirements, noting insufficient grounds for continued custody after six months.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail on ₹25,000 with sureties; directed to report to police station every Monday for one month and cooperate in investigation.

Amruta Alias Amruit Gulab Parhad Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

1/5 17 ABA-968-20.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.968 OF 2020

¶4

Mandira Salgaonkar

¶5

Digitally signed byMandira Salgaonkar Date: 2020.12.18 00:17:38 +0530

¶6

Amruta alias Amrut Gulab Parhad ..Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra.. Respondent

¶7

Mr.Ajinkya Udane for the Applicant.

¶8

Mrs.M.M.Deshmukh, APP for the State.

¶9

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.
 DATED : 16th DECEMBER, 2020

¶10

P.C:-

¶11

1.The Anticipatory Bail Application of the applicant came to
be rejected on 5th December, 2020 by the Additional Sessions
Judge, Pune, and hence he is before this Court.

¶12

2.The applicant is arraigned as an accused in C.R.No.354 of
2020 registered at Shikrapur Police Station on 14th June, 2020.
The FIR is lodged by one Shantaram Bajirao Parhad and he has
referred to an incident dated 13th June, 2020. The complaint
has resulted into invocation of Sections 307, 323, 324, 325,
326, 452, 427, 506, 504, 143, 147, 148 and 149 of IPC. The
applicant is indicted as accused No.3. The learned counsel for
the applicant makes a statement that out of total twenty one
persons, who have been arraigned as accused have been
released either on regular bail or anticipatory bail, barring the
present applicant.

¶13

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶14

2/5 17 ABA-968-20.doc

¶15

3. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the
applicant and learned APP, perused the FIR which has now
culminated into charge-sheet filed on 24th August, 2020. The
version of the complainant is that there was an ongoing dispute
between his cousins belonging to the same family in respect of
an ancestral land. It is alleged that attempts were made to
effect mutation of the said land in their names. Though, for
last three months, the informant and his family are in
possession of their portion of land, repeated attempts were
made on part of the other side to divest them of their
possession.

¶16

An incident dated 13th June, 2020 is then referred to and
it is stated that when the complainant alongwith his family
members was present at his home, the accused persons, namely,
Bansi Parhad, Aabasaheb Parhad, Amrut Parhad (applicant) and
Daulatrao Parhad came in front of his house, armed with iron
rods and wooden sticks. It is then alleged that one tempo
arrived at the spot and some 8 to 10 persons alighted, which
include two named accused Mahendra and Aakash. It is then
alleged that all the accused persons assaulted the informant
and his family. With minute details, the entire incident has
been narrated. As far as the present applicant is concerned, it is
alleged that he was armed with wooden stick and he hit one
Yashoda Parhad, which caused a fracture to her hand.
Undisputedly, because of the injuries sustained by other injured,
offence under Section 307 has been invoked.

¶17

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶18

3/5 17 ABA-968-20.doc

¶19

4.However, as the learned counsel has stated that all the
accused persons, barring the present applicant, have been
released on bail, the case of the applicant will have to be
decided by discerning the role attributed to the applicant. The
witnesses, whose statements are compiled in the charge-sheet,
also corroborate the version of the complainant. In order to
ascertain as to what was the injury attributed to the present
applicant, the certificate of injured being Yashoda has been
placed on record. Immediately after the incident, she was
referred to Rural Hospital, Shikrapur and the following injuries
were noted.

¶20

“1.Abrasion on left wrist of 2cm X 2cm

¶21

2.Contusion on left shoulder of 4cm X 2cm

¶22

3.Contusion on left thigh of 4cm X 2cm X 1cm”

¶23

Thereafter she was referred to a private hospital by name Surya
Hospital, Shikrapur where she was examined on 14th June,
2020, which revealed fracture on X-ray. The said injury is
grievous and is opined to have been caused by hard and blunt
object. Even assuming and taking the said certificate to be true
and correct report of the injury, it is a fracture on wrist and at
the most, Section 326 would be invoked against the present
applicant. In the FIR, there is no allegation that the applicant
has assaulted any other injured whereby he could be attributed
for an offence under Section 307 of the IPC. Undisputedly,
since Sections 143, 147 and 149 have been invoked, the issue
as to whether the applicant would be held responsible for the

¶24

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶25

4/5 17 ABA-968-20.doc

¶26

injuries caused by the others, particularly when his presence at
the spot is not disputed, is a matter of trial.

¶27

5.In light of the clear facts surfacing on the basis of the
charge-sheet and the role attributed to the applicant of
assaulting injured Yashoda by means of wooden stick in her
head, merely because recovery of the weapon has to be done,
his custodial interrogation cannot be sought after lapse of a
period of six months. In these circumstances, subject to the
stipulation that the applicant will co-operate with the
investigation by reporting to the police station on every Monday
between 10.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. for one month, he is entitled
to be released on bail.

¶28

: ORDER:

¶29

(a) Application is allowed.

¶30

(b) In the event of arrest in C.R.No.354 of 2020
registered with Shikrapur Police Station, applicant-
Amruta alias Amrut Gulab Parhad shall be released on
bail on furnishing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs.25,000/-
with one or two sureties of the like amount.

¶31

(c)The applicant shall attend the concerned police
station on every Monday between 10.00 a.m. and 2.00
p.m. for one month and shall co-operate in the
investigation.

¶32

(d)The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted

¶33

M.M.Salgaonkar

¶34

5/5 17 ABA-968-20.doc

¶35

with facts of case so as to dissuade him from disclosing
the facts to Court or any Police Officer and shall not
tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶36

 SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J

¶37

M.M.Salgaonkar

Amruta Alias Amruit Gulab Parhad v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amruta Alias Amruit Gulab Parhad 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

Sachin Prakash Javalkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunil Haribhau Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunil Ashok Ghawate and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anita @ Anupama Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Maruti Akhade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Aniket Dattatraya Aadhawale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.