Allowed

Rohit Shekhar Bajaj and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC4 Oct 2024ABA/656/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by three applicants accused of assault causing grievous injury. The court held that the FIR did not specifically implicate the applicants for causing a fracture injury, noting a free fight scenario with no weapon recovered. The court also found that the applicants cooperated with police during an interim period, confirming the interim order

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application allowed by confirming the interim order dated 24.04.2024.

Rohit Shekhar Bajaj and Others Vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

942-ABA-656-2024.odt

¶2

2024:BHC-AUG:23855

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 656 OF 2024

¶5

2. Chetan Shekhar Bajaj
3. Arbaj Ammed Shaikh
3. Ram Jijaba Salve
VERSUS

¶6

The State Of Maharashtra And Another

¶7

• Mr. D. R. Kale, Advocate for the Applicants • Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, APP for the Respondent/State ******* CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J DATE : OCTOBER 04, 2024

¶8

PER COURT :

¶9

1.Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with

¶10

with C.R. No. 171 of 2024 registered with Karjat

¶11

Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar for the offences
punishable under Sections 326, 324, 337, 323, 504, 506
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

2.Informant Akash reported the incident occurred
on 14.03.2024 at about 01.30 pm. From the FIR it seems

¶13

that the incident had occurred on the issue of the

¶14

alleged sending of messages by the informant to the
sister of accused Rohit. It is alleged in the FIR that

¶15

the Applicants assaulted informant, his father and

¶16

brother. In the said incident, Akshay, brother of

¶17

informant, sustained grievous injury.

¶18

Umesh PAGE 1 OF 3

¶19

942-ABA-656-2024.odt

¶20

3.Learned Counsel for the Applicants has drawn
attention of the Court to the FIR dated 170/2024
registered with the Karjat Police Station in respect of
the same incident wherein it is specifically stated
that the informants’ side caused assault on the
Applicants and others and some of them were required to

¶21

be admitted in the hospital. By referring to the
present FIR, it is submitted that there are no specific
allegations against Applicants as to who has caused
injury to Akshay. Thus, according to him, this could be
a case of false/over implication.

¶22

4.Learned APP opposed the application by drawing
attention of the Court to the statement of witnesses as
well as injury certificate which shows that Akshay
sustained fracture injury to his wrist. He has also
drawn attention of the Court to the criminal history of
Applicant Arbhaz and Ram. Thus, according to him, it is
not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶23

5.Perusal of both FIR i.e. in Crime Nos. 170 &
171/2024 indicates that definitely some incident had
occurred on 14.03.2024. From the allegations in both

¶24

PAGE 2 OF 3

¶25

Umesh

¶26

942-ABA-656-2024.odt

¶27

reports and from the fact that both sides sustained
injuries, this could be a case of free fight occurred
between two parties. There is no specific allegation
against present Applicants as to who has caused
fracture injury to Akshay.

¶28

6.Having regard to these facts and also in view

¶29

of the fact that no weapon is to be recovered, it is a
fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶30

7.Though it is sought to be argued that two

¶31

Applicants are having criminal antecedents, however,
after grant of interim relief to them, they attended
the concerned police station and cooperated in the
investigation. There is nothing on record to indicate
breach of conditions of interim order has been
committed by the Applicants. Hence, application is
allowed by confirming interim order dated 24.04.2024.

¶32

 (R.M. JOSHI, J.)

¶33

PAGE 3 OF 3

¶34

Umesh

Rohit Shekhar Bajaj and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Shekhar Bajaj and Others 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

President Secretary Sri Bruhanmath Hotgi and Anr. vs Pandurang Chintaman Kengar and Ors.

Ananda Kaduji Korde and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Ravikant Shridharrao Dahale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Dilip Pandhari Jabhade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dipak Ramnivas Shillak Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sagar Girdharilal Shillak Vs Dipak Ramnivas Shillak and Another