Allowed

Yashwant Manohar Avhad and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC5 Feb 2021ABA/108/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants charged under the IPC for an affray involving alleged assault and property damage. The judge observed that while the State's FIR alleged mob action with iron rods, the applicants' cross-case revealed a serious skull fracture to a victim from the opposing group that the State's FIR failed to explain, indicating an exaggerated version of facts a

What did the court decide?

Applicants directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000 with one or two sureties if arrested.

Yashwant Manohar Avhad and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

34 ABA 108-2021 34.1 aba 109-2021.odt

¶2

1 / 4

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 108 OF 2021

¶5

1. Yashwant Manohar Avhad
2. Nandkumar Bhujang Avhad... Applicants
 versus
The State of Maharashtra.... Respondent

¶6

WITH CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 109 OF 2021

¶7

Rahul Manohar Avhad ... Applicant
 versus
The State of Maharashtra.... Respondent

¶8

Mr. Tushar Sonawane a/w. Mr. Rupesh A Zade, Advocate for the
Applicants in both Anticipatory Bail Applications.
Mrs. J. S. Lohokare, APP for State-Respondent.
Mr. R. M. Ghade, Yawat Police Station, Pune Gramin, Pune.

¶9

CORAM: SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE: 05th FEBRUARY, 2021

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

. The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in

¶12

connection with C.R. No.1107/2020 dated 9th December 2020
registered at Yavat Police Station under Sections 327, 452, 354-B,

¶13

Manjusha

¶14

2 / 4 34 ABA 108-2021 34.1 aba 109-2021.odt

¶15

143, 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 427 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code.
The main Sections being 327 and 354-B of Indian Penal Code.

¶16

2. The F.I.R is lodged by one Amol Avhad. He has stated

¶17

that the applicant Yashwant and his relatives are his neighbours.
On 7th December 2020, there was a quarrel between Yashwant and
informant’s group. On 8th December 2020, at about 5.30 p.m.,
about 23 accused including the present applicants came in front of
the house of the first informant. They were having iron rods. They
entered their house and damaged the articles. There are
allegations that the mob assaulted the informant, one Sanjay
Avhad, Anand Avhad, Sunita, Komal and others with iron roads
and sticks. There are allegations that the accused tried to pull
sarees of Priyanka and Ratan. On this basis, the F.I.R. is lodged.

¶18

3. Heard Mr. Rupesh Zade, learned Counsel for the
applicants and Mrs. J. S. Lohokare, learned APP for the State.

¶19

4. Learned Counsel for the applicants submitted that the
applicants group has lodged their own F.I.R. vide C.R.No.1111 of
2020 Yavat Police Station on the same day mainly under Section

¶20

307 in respect of the same incident. In that case, there are

¶21

3 / 4 34 ABA 108-2021 34.1 aba 109-2021.odt

¶22

allegations that Amol had assaulted one Deepak Avhad and it was
a serious injury. Others from Amol’s group had assaulted him and
his relatives further. He submitted that thus, the allegations in the
F.I.R against the applicants are not true.

¶23

5. Learned APP relied on the averments in the F.I.R and
statements of the eye witnesses who had identically narrated the
incident as described in the F.I.R. She relied on the injury
certificates of the injured suffered from informant’s side. She fairly
conceded that all the injuries were simple in nature.

¶24

6. I have considered these submissions and I have perused
the investigation papers. In the investigation against the present
applicants, the injuries suffered by injured Kavita, Nitin, Amol and
Subhadra have all suffered simple injuries. On the other hand, in
the cross F.I.R. lodged by the applicant’s group. Deepak had
suffered a serious head injury. It was scull fracture. This injury is
not referred to or explained by the informant in the F.I.R. against
present applicant. Thus, there is clear attempt to project
exaggerated version in the F.I.R. against the present applicants. No
serious particular role is attributed to either of the applicants in

¶25

4 / 4 34 ABA 108-2021 34.1 aba 109-2021.odt

¶26

the F.I.R . The F.I.R does not appear to be true depiction of facts. In
this view of the matter, particularly considering the serious injury
suffered by Deepak from the applicant’s group, the applicants
deserve to be protected by an order of anticipatory bail. Hence, the
following order.

¶27

ORDER

¶28

(i) In the event of their arrest, in connection with C.R. No.1107/2020 registered at Yavat Police Station,, the Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) each with one or two sureties each in the like amount.

¶29

(ii) Both the Applications stand disposed of accordingly.

¶30

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Yashwant Manohar Avhad and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yashwant Manohar Avhad and Anr. 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 Shivaji Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sujata Manik Salunkhe Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dattatray @ Datta Balu Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kuchya @ Vishal Anantya @ Popat Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Abhaysinh Rajendra Kaldhone Vs the State of Maharashtra

Zahid Ahmed Khurshid Ahmed Vs the State of Maharashtra