Allowed

Bhagwat Shrikrushna Kharad and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC13 Jun 2023ABA/258/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An anticipatory bail application was dismissed for the first applicant based on withdrawal. For the remaining applicants facing assault charges, the Court granted bail on parity with a prior order for similar accused, relaxing custody as investigation was complete.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to Jalindar and Macchindra on furnishing PR bond of Rs. 15,000 with one surety, subject to conditions of attending police station and not contacting witnesses.

Bhagwat Shrikrushna Kharad and Another Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

920-ABA-258-2023.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.258 OF 2023

¶4

WITH ABA/564/2023

¶5

BHAGWAT SHRIKRUSHNA KHARAD AND ANOTHER

¶6

VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

¶7

...

¶8

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. R. V. Gore
APP for Respondents: Mrs. R. P. Gaur

¶9

...

¶10

CORAM:R.M. JOSHI, J
DATE:JUNE 13, 2023

¶11

PER COURT :

¶12

1.At the outset, when this Court has shown

¶13

disinclination to entertain the Application of Bhagwat
Kharad, learned Counsel for this Applicant, on
instructions, seeks withdrawal of the Application.

¶14

2.Application stands dismissed as withdrawn qua
Applicant No. 1 – Bhagwat Kharad.

¶15

3.Applicant No. 2 – Jalindar in ABA/258/2023 as
well as Applicant – Macchindra in ABA/564/2023 are
apprehending arrest in connection with C.R. No.
440/2022 registered with Paithan Police Station for the
offences punishable under Sections 307, 324, 143, 144,

¶16

147, 148, 149, 506 of Indian Penal Code.

¶17

Page 1 of 5

¶18

920-ABA-258-2023.odt

¶19

4.Nanasaheb Kharad gave information to the

¶20

police stating that on 03.12.2022 in the evening at
about 07.00 pm an incident occurred in which Arjun,
Bhagwat, Avinash, Macchindra and Jalindar threatened
the informant for withdrawal of the complaint lodged by
them. On the next day at about 07.00 pm when the
informant was going to his house from the agricultural
field he noticed that his brother Satish and Nandu had
sustained injuries and they were assaulted by the
Applicants and others specifically named in the FIR.
There is allegation against co-accused Bhagwat and
Jalindhar of instigating the assault. Against Jalindhar
itisalsoallegedthathe assaulted informant with stick.

¶21

5.Learned Counsel for the Applicants states that
as far as the Applicant – Macchindra is concerned,
there is no allegation against him that he has caused
any assault on informant or other injured persons. It
is his contention that similarly placed accused are
granted anticipatory bail by order dated 08.02.2023
passed in ABA/1798/2021 and hence on parity this
Application deserves to be allowed. As far as Jalindhar
is concerned, it is submitted that though there is

¶22

Page 2 of 5

¶23

920-ABA-258-2023.odt

¶24

allegation of instigation and assault against him,
however, it is alleged that he has used wooden stick.
It is submitted that having regard to the injury
certificate placed on record doubt is created as to
whether the injured Santosh suffered simple or grievous
injuries. According to him, investigation in the crime
is already completed. Hence, the custody of the
Applicants is not necessary.

¶25

6.Learned APP opposed the application with the
contention that it is a serious offence wherein two
groups had fought with each other with weapons. There
is specific allegation against Jalindhar for
instigation of the assault to police by use of weapon.
In this regard, reference is made to the injury
certificate of Nandu to show that he sustained grievous
injury. In the statement of Nandu names of the number
of assailants including Jalindhar and Macchindra are
mentioned. It is submitted that having regard to the
seriousnessof the offence applications may be rejected.

¶26

7.There is no dispute about the fact that in the
first information report allegations are made against

¶27

Bhagwat, Arjun and Jalindhar for causing assault.

¶28

Page 3 of 5

¶29

920-ABA-258-2023.odt

¶30

Perusal of the order dated 08th February, 2023 passed in
ABA/1798/2022 shows that similarly placed accused were
granted anticipatory bail. Thus, at this stage, this
Court finds no reason for not extending parity to the
present Applicant Macchindra.

¶31

8.As far as Applicant Jalindhar is concerned,
there is allegation against him that he used stick in
the said assault. Use of the stick prima facie has

¶32

resulted into causing of simple injuries to the
informant. As regards injury caused to Nandu, the
injury certificate indicates that the said injuries
caused with hard and sharp object. At least at this

¶33

stage these injuries cannot be attributed to Jalindhar
who was holding stick in his hand as per the statement
of witnesses. The investigation into the crime is over.
Further, there is nothing on record to show that there
are criminal antecedents against Applicant Jalindhar.
In such circumstances, this Court finds liberty of this
Applicant needs to be protected.

¶34

9.Hence, the order:

¶35

(i)In the event of arrest the Applicants –

¶36

Page 4 of 5

¶37

920-ABA-258-2023.odt

¶38

Jalindhar and Machindra in connection with
C.R. No. 440/2022 registered with Paithan
Police Station for the offences punishable
under Sections 307, 324, 143, 144, 147,
148, 149, 506 of Indian Penal Code, they
shall be released on bail on furnishing PR
bond of Rs. 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand
Only) each with one solvent surety in the
like amount.

¶39

(ii) They shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

¶40

(iii)They shall not contact the prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.

¶41

(iv) They shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶42

(v) They is further directed to cooperate the investigating agency for further investigation.

¶43

 (R.M. JOSHI, J.)

¶44

Malani

¶45

Page 5 of 5

Bhagwat Shrikrushna Kharad and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagwat Shrikrushna Kharad and Another 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

Shahdeo Mahadeo Shinde Vs Rajani W/O Namdeo Phunde

Amruta Deepak Gohil Vs Deepak Bhagwat Gohil and Others

Mohammad Abdul Asif S/O. Mohammad Abdul Majid @ Habu Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bhimrao Bhikaji Pandav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gafarkha Yakubkhan Golandaj and Other Vs Lalbee Inayat Khan (Died), through L.Rs. Samiulla Khan Inayat Khan (Died) and Other

Shaikh Mehraj Shaikh Manzoor Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others