Dismissed

Anuj Sushant Pavnekar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC5 Apr 2022BA/324/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-day order dismisses a bail application filed by a student charged with murder and attempt to murder following an altercationsfatality. The court rejected the claim that the act was done in a moment of passion, finding sufficient premeditation based on witness testimony.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; applicant remains in custody pending trial.

Anuj Sushant Pavnekar Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

ba324.22.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 324 OF 2022

¶4

Anuj S/o Sushant Pavnekar

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra & another

¶7

Respondents

¶8

Mr. M. M. Patil (Beedkar), Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V. S. Badakh, APP for respondent/State.

¶9

CORAM : M.G. Sewlikar, J. DATE : 5^th APRIL, 2022.

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enlarging the applicant on bail in connection with Crime No. 0213/2021 registered with Himayatnagar Police Station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

Case of the prosecution in brief is that informant is the father of Yash Uttamrao Mirase (since deceased). On 11^th September, 2021, the informant was intimated about Yash having sustained injury on his chest. Informant was told that there was altercation

¶13

ba324.22.odt

¶14

between Yash and the applicant at the bus stand between 12.00 and 12.30 noon as Yash suspected that applicant was spreading rumors about the group and was defaming the group. Yash slapped the applicant. Applicant left the place weeping and came back with two of his friends by the name of Salim and Karansingh. Applicant assaulted Soham Sharad Chayal by means of a knife. The blow was aimed at the abdomen of Sohal Chayal but he managed to evade it as a result of which, he sustained injury to his right waist. Applicant stabbed Yash on his chest. Yash was admitted in the hospital by Sohan and Salim. However, he passed away during treatment.

¶15

Heard Shri Patil, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Badakh, learned APP for the State.

¶16

Learned counsel Shri Patil submits that the applicant is aged 18 years. Applicant and deceased were in the same class in the school. They were also in the same coaching class. He submits that the incident took place on the spur of the moment without premeditation. Applicant is a student of 12^th class and he has to pursue his studies. Therefore, he sought release of the applicant on bail.

¶17

¶18

ba324.22.odt

¶19

Learned APP Shri Badakh opposed the application.

¶20

Charge-sheet is fled. Sohan Chayal, the injured and eyewitness has stated in his statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that applicant was jealous of the group of deceased Yash. On the day of the incident, this witness slapped Anuj Pawankar. Deceased Yash also beat him. Thereafter, applicant left the place saying that he would be back with his friends. Applicant came there with his friends Salim and Karansingh. Soon thereafter, applicant fshed out a knife and stabbed it in the abdoment of witness Sohan Chayal. He managed to ward it off and the blow landed on his right waist. Accused Salim was trying to control the applicant but the applicant somehow managed to get himself released and assaulted Yash in his chest. Having considering the chronology of these events, it cannot be said that the incident happened on the spur of moment without there being any premeditation. In this view of the matter, I am not inclined to release the applicant. Hence the following order :

¶21

ORDER

¶22

i) Application is dismissed.

¶23

ba324.22.odt

¶24

ii) It is clarifed that the observations made in the above order are restricted to the decision of this application only and the trial Court shall not get influenced by the same and can come to its independent conclusion during trial.

¶25

( M. G. SEWLIKAR ) Judge

¶26

dyb

Anuj Sushant Pavnekar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Sushant Pavnekar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Mayur Bapusaheb Naik Vs the State of Maharashtra

Maroti Kamaji Mudhol Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rahul @ Raosaheb Kailas More Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Mukesh Dattatraya Mankar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Suhas Madhukarrao Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Karbhari Vitthal Misal Vs the State of Maharashtra