Allowed

Anil Damodhar Chidrewar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC18 Nov 2024ABA/1494/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application, the court confirmed an earlier interim protection order granted on 30.08.2024. The court noted that investigation was nearly complete and further interrogation was unnecessary, disposing of the application accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; interim protection ordered on 30.08.2024 confirmed; application disposed of.

Anil Damodhar Chidrewar Vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:27030

¶2

¶3

1494.24ABA

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

74 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1494 OF 2024

¶6

ANIL DAMODHAR CHIDREWAR VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANOTHER

¶8

Advocate for Applicant : Mr.S.V.Mundhe APP for Respondent-State : Mr.G.O.Wattamwar

¶9

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 18.11.2024

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

1] Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State.

¶12

2] The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 0411 of 2024, registered at Udgir Gramin Police Station, Taluka Udgir, District Latur, for the offences punishable under sections 118 (1), 118 (2), 352, 351 (2), 351 (3) and 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶13

3] This Court, by order dated 30.08.2024, has granted interim protection to the applicant. The case putforth against the applicant by the informant is that there are some weapons used against the informant by which the informant has sustained injuries. There are cross FIR filed against each other.

¶14

¶15

1494.24ABA

¶16

4] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is inconsistent statement of the informant. At the initial point, the informant has stated that sharp weapon is used by the applicant, thereafter, he says that the applicant has assaulted by back portion of Gun and thereafter he says that the applicant has used gun.

¶17

5] The learned APP submits that the pistol is recovered from the applicant and the applicant has license for the weapon.

¶18

6] The Hospital has opined that there is no bullet injury caused to the informant, so also, the injuries caused to the informant as 1 cm x 1cm x 2 cm deep round wound over neck region below mastoid bone (L) side and another injury is caused by sharp object 1cm x 1cm x 1 cm.

¶19

7] It appears that the investigation in the matter is almost completed. No further interrogation of the applicant is necessary. In view of the same, the earlier interim protection granted by order dated 30.08.2024 stands confirmed. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶20

DDC

¶21

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE

Anil Damodhar Chidrewar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Damodhar Chidrewar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradip Shivaji Shinde and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Shaikh Khaled Shaikh Jalil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ranjit Shivdas Shendge Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Mahamad Akhil Mahamad Khaza Khureshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Shubham Saibu Palle Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Mohammad Usman S/O Akbar Ali Chaudhari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another