Premises court granted anticipatory bail to two applicants facing charges under various sections of IPC arising from a family dispute over water usage involving alleged assault and cross FIRs.
Application allowed; applicants released on bail subject to furnishing P.R. Bond and sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Urmila Ingale
903-aba-305-23.odt
Digitally signed PRADNYA by PRADNYAMAKARAND MAKARAND BHOGALE BHOGALE Date:2023.02.03 10:44:05 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 305 OF 2023
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent
Mr. Tejas Hilage for the Applicant. Mr. S. H. Yadav, APP for the State. PSI- Mr. Rathod Rajendra, Mohol Police Station present.
CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.
DATE : FEBRUARY 1, 2023
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned
APP.
2. This is an application for pre-arrest bail. The applicants are apprehending arrest in connection with C.R. No. 995 of 2022 dated 13/11/2022 lodged at 19:33 hours registered with Mohol Police Station for offence punishable under sections 307, 323, 324, 34, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
3. In the FIR it is alleged that there was some dispute
1/3
903-aba-305-23.odt
Urmila Ingale
between the family of the applicants and family of the complainant who are related to each other. The dispute was over drawing water from the well. In the altercations that followed, the parties clashed. The complainant has alleged that he was assaulted by Ranjit with an iron rod. The medical certificate is produced. So far as the present applicants are concerned, it is alleged that they have assaulted with stones. The injury certificate is produced. It appears that the injury is mainly attributed to Ranjit. From the applicant’s side, Ranjit is injured. The cross FIR had been filed by the complainants side on 14/11/2022 at 02:06 hours. Considering the nature of the accusations and that there are cross FIRs and the role of the present applicants, custodial interrogation of the applicants in the present case is not required, however, the applicants have to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the following order.
O R D E R
(a) The application is allowed.
(b) In the event of arrest of the applicants in connection with C.R. No.995 of 2022 dated 13/11/2022 registered with Mohol Police Station,
2/3
Urmila Ingale
903-aba-305-23.odt
the appliant no 1- Shantabai Dharma Shrikhande and applicant no. 2- Vikas Dharma Shrikhande be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount;
(c) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and should not tamper with evidence;
(d) The applicants shall report to the investigating officer on 7th & 8th February 2023 between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. and thereafter as and when called for.
(M. S. KARNIK, J.)
3/3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant pre-arrest anticipatory bail in connection with offences under sections 307, 323, 324, 34, 504 and 506 IPC arising from a domestic dispute involving assault and cross FIRs
Whether custodial interrogation is required given the nature of the allegations and presence of cross FIRs
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shantabai Dharma Shrikhande
Vikas Dharma Shrikhande
The State of Maharashtra
M. S. KARNIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
