Partly allowed

Rameshwar Shivaji Renge v. Gajanan Madhav Renge and Other

Bombay HC20 Sept 2023APPLN/3454/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Aurangabad refused bail to consecutive applications filed by the accused in a criminal case involving murder and assault. The court held that the facts cited as changing circumstances were known to the applicants during the earlier hearing and thus rejected the plea. A related co-applicant's bail application was allowed.

What did the court decide?

Bail applications dismissed as to Gajanан, Rahul, and State's interest; Criminal Application No. 3454 of 2023 allowed as to Rameshwar.

Rameshwar Shivaji Renge Vs Gajanan Madhav Renge and Other — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

903-BA-1314-23.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1314 OF 2023

¶5

GAJANAN MADHAV RENGE

¶6

RAHUL GAJANAN RENGE VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶8

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Babasaheb A. Dhengle, Mr.Tulshidas J. Poul

¶9

APP for Respondent/State : Mr. S. P. Tiwari

¶10

WITH

¶11

APPLICATION NO.3454 OF 2023 IN BA/1314/2023

¶12

RAMESHWAR SHIVAJI RENGE VERSUS

¶13

GAJANAN MADHAV RENGE

¶14

RAHUL GAJANAN RENGE

¶15

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶16

Advocate for Applicant/complainant : Mr. Pralhad D. Bachate Advocate for Respondents Nos.1 and 2 : Mr. B. A. Dhengle Advocate for Respondent No.3/State : Mr. S. P. Tiwari

¶17

CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.

¶18

DATE : 20-09-2023

¶19

PER COURT :-

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.P.P. for the respondent/State and the learned counsel for the complainant.

¶21

903-BA-1314-23.odt

¶22

¶23

This is a successive bail application of the applicants seeking bail in C.R.No.0276 of 2022 registered with Police Station Daithana Police Station, District Parbhani, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 324, 323, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

The first change is the change of lawyer. Present lawyer would submit that earlier the proper guidance was not given to the applicants, hence, no proper arguments were advanced. He would further submit that the first information report was lodged against the opponent. There was dispute over mutation entry. The learned counsel would submit that considering the facts, Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code would not attract.

¶25

The learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel for the victim would argue that whatever the facts argued by the learned counsel for the applicants were well within the knowledge of accused. It is not digestible that earlier application was filed without knowledge and complete information. This is not the forum to determine which section would apply.

¶26

The learned APP and learned counsel for the victim appears to have correctly argued that the change in circumstances as argued, were presumed to be in the knowledge of the applicants when the earlier bail application was filed. While hearing the earlier bail application, the Court heard the learned counsel for the

¶27

3 903-BA-1314-23.odt

¶28

applicants at length and had also gone through the chargesheet. The Court does not agree with the learned counsel for the applicants that the facts he argued are the change in circumstance. Hence, the application stands dismissed.

¶29

Criminal application No.3454 of 2023 is allowed.

¶30

( S. G. MEHARE ) JUDGE

¶31

rrd

Rameshwar Shivaji Renge v. Gajanan Madhav Renge and Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rameshwar Shivaji Renge v. Gajanan Madhav Renge and Other

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Venkatrao Hariba Patil Vs Trimbak B.Patil(Died)Lrs Vithal T.Kollekar and Other

Venkatrao Hariba Patil Vs Trimbak B.PATIL(DIED0LRS Vithal T.Kollekar 7 Othrs

Pralhad Khandu Jadhav and Another Vs Vaibhav Jagannath Lokhande and Ors.

Doshi Automobiles . Vs Ramrao Udhavrao Kanade and Others.

Gajanan Madhav Renge and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dilip Kantilal Chordia and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra