Disposed

Sachin Raibhan Khajekar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC4 Dec 2024ABA/963/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application for offences including Section 307 IPC arising from a neighbour quarrel. Interim protection granted earlier was confirmed, subject to conditions of attendance at police station, no tampering with evidence, and cooperation.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection from arrest confirmed under stated conditions of cooperation and non-tampering.

Sachin Raibhan Khajekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

963.24ABA

¶2

2024:BHC-AUG:28535

¶3

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

950 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 963 OF 2024

¶6

SACHIN S/O. RAIBHAN KHAJEKAR VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANOTHER

¶8

Advocate for the applicant : Mr.A.K.Bhosle APP for the respondent-State : Mr.P.P.Dawalkar

¶9

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 04.12.2024

¶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.127/2024, registered with Cantonment [Chavani] Police Station, Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under Section 307, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

3] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that this Court, by order dated 4^th July, 2024, has granted interim protection in favour of the applicant on the condition that the applicant to attend the concerned police station as and when required and to co-operate in the

¶14

¶15

963.24ABA

¶16

investigation. The learned counsel further submits that the applicant has co-operated with the investigation.

¶17

4] The learned counsel for the informant has shown video of the incident on it’s mobile. The fight is between the neighbors and there is altercation, resulting into some kind of quarrel.

¶18

5] Considering that as per the medical certificate, the injury is simple and that the applicant has co-operated with the investigation. In view of the same, the interim protection granted by order dated 4^th July, 2024 stands confirmed, on the following condition :

¶19

i] The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

¶20

ii] The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner. He shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case.

¶21

iii] The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and also in the proceedings before the trial Court.

¶22

¶23

963.24ABA

¶24

6] In the event, the applicant violates any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be cancelled.

¶25

7] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present anticipatory bail application and the trial Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.

¶26

8] The application stands disposed of.

¶27

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE

¶28

DDC

Sachin Raibhan Khajekar v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Raibhan Khajekar 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

Ananta Bhaginathrao Bidve Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yogesh Bhimrao Kondewad @ Kondewar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Amol Balasaheb Markali Vs the State of Maharashtra

Wahidoddin Sayyad Kamaruddin Sayyad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Varsha W/O Sachin Khajekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sundar Machindra Shinde and Other Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another