Allowed

Sudam Fakirrao Adhane v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Oct 2023ABA/914/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Bombay HC granted anticipatory bail to Sudam Adhane in a case involving offences under the IPC and Arms Act. The court allowed the bail after considering inconsistent witness statements and the quashing of the FIR against coaccused with the informant's consent, noting no recovery was needed from the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Interim order allowing anticipatory bail subject to attendance at the concerned police station until the filing of the charge-sheet.

Sudam Fakirrao Adhane Vs the State of Maharashtra — Quashing and FIR | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

aba914.23.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 914 OF 2023

¶5

Sudam s/o Fakirrao Adhane

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

Respondent

¶10

Mr. R. A. Jaiswal, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. G. L. Deshpande, APP for the State.

¶11

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 9^th OCTOBER, 2023.

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with Crime No. 0188/2023 registered with Pishor Police Station, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 324, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 153(B), 109 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 27 of Arms Act.

¶14

First informant Abdul Karim Nabi Patel reported to the police about the incident occurred on 29^th May, 2023 at about 2.00 pm wherein the incident of violence took place on account of playing DJ infront of a mosque. Present applicant alleged to have instigated the said violence. As per the said report, about 100 to 150 persons

¶15

¶16

aba914.23.odt

¶17

were involved in the causing of riotous situation and in the said incident three persons including the son of the informant sustained injuries.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that coaccused had moved an application for quashment of the First Information Report and by consent of the informant, the same has been quashed by Division Bench of this Court by order dated 19^th August, 2023 passed in Criminal Application No. 2661/2023 and others. It is his submission that there is no allegation against the present applicant of causing actual assault on any of the victims. As such, it is his contention that custodial interrogation of the application is not necessary as nothing is to be recovered from him.

¶19

Learned APP opposed the application on the ground that offence is serious in nature. However, there is no dispute made about the fact that by consent of the informant herein, First Information Report has been quashed by this Court against the coaccused.

¶20

¶21

aba914.23.odt

¶22

Perusal of the First Information Report though indicates that present applicant is said to be the one who has asked the DJ to be played infront of the mosque, however, statements recorded during the course of investigation are not consistent in this regard. In fact, one of the witnesses claims that present applicant was the one who had rescued the victims. Considering this fact coupled with the informant consenting for quashment of First Information Report even against those accused who had caused actual assault, there is no propriety in rejecting application. Nothing is to be recovered from applicant. Applicant has no criminal history and he is not likely to flee from justice. In the peculiar facts and circumstances, application is allowed in terms of the interim order. The condition of attendance of concerned police station shall remain in force till fling of the charge-sheet.

¶23

( R. M. JOSHI) Judge

¶24

dyb

Sudam Fakirrao Adhane v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudam Fakirrao Adhane 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

Chandrakant Dagadu Bharmal and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ramchandra Murlidhar Mandlik and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra

Narayan Mahadeorao Gaikwad Vs Pradip Vishnu Gaikwad and Another

Babulal S/O Devidas Rathod and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra Another

Sariput Arjun Ingole Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sunita W/O Bharat Jadhav and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra