Allowed

Lakhan Rohidas Bhosale v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC4 Apr 2024APEAL/218/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Appeal No. 218 of 2024, the High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) allowed the appeal and granted bail to the appellant accused of caste-based atrocities and physical assault. The court imposed conditions including a personal bond, prohibition of entering the victim's locality, and restrictions on contacting witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Appellant released on bail with a personal bond and surety of Rs. 15,000/- and directed not to enter the victim's locality or contact witnesses.

Lakhan Rohidas Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:7242

¶2

{1}

¶3

criapel218-24.doc

¶4

drp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.218 OF 2024

¶6

Lakhan Rohidas Bhosale APPELLANT

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of Maharashtra and Others RESPONDENTS

¶9

....... Mr. V. D. Sapkal, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Adinath B. Jagtap, Advocate for the appellant

¶10

Mr. C. V. Bhadane, APP for respondent - State

¶11

Mr. Angad L. Kanade, Advocate for respondent No.3

¶12

[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.] DATE : 4th APRIL, 2024

¶13

ORDER :

¶14

This appeal, filed under section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, challenges order dated 20^th February, 2024 passed by learned Special Judge (Atrocity), Osmanabad in Bail Application No. 65 of 2024.

¶15

Respondent No.3 lodged FIR on 20^th December, 2023 alleging that on 16^th December, 2023, at about 9.00 p.m. Ganesh Rochakari, Lakhan Bhosale, Vishwajit Amrutrao , Sushant Sapate and two unknown persons have assaulted him. Appellant has taken informant to other accused persons, on his motorcycle.

¶16

{2} criapel218-24.doc

¶17

When they reached at a playground at about 9.30 p.m. Ganesh, Vishwajit, Sushant and two others were consuming liquor there. Informant was also offered liquor, but he refused. Then he was offered cold drink. While informant was drinking cold drink, Ganesh assaulted him on back with iron rod and Vishwajit, Sushant, Lakhan (appellant) and others assaulted him with fist and kick blows and beer bottle. Ganesh inflicted blows of iron rod on his head. Ganesh pointed a pistol at his head and abused him in the name of caste. Ganesh also urinated on him and spat on his face. At that time, appellant pulled Ganesh back and requested him not to assault informant.

¶18

Pursuant to registration of crime, appellant was arrested on 2^nd February, 2024. His application for bail is rejected by the trial court. Hence, the present appeal.

¶19

Heard learned Senior Advocate for appellant, learned APP for the State and learned advocate for respondent No. 3 – informant. Perused the investigation papers.

¶20

Learned APP as well as learned advocate for informant have opposed bail application, contending that it is appellant, who had taken informant to the accused persons, where he is assaulted. So also specific allegations of assault by beer bottle are made against appellant and appellant has criminal

¶21

{3} criapel218-24.doc

¶22

antecedents. Main accused Ganesh is yet to be arrested.

¶23

Learned Senior Advocate for appellant submits that out of three offences registered against appellant, he is already acquitted in two offences i.e. Crime No. 176 of 2007 and 80 of 2010 registered with Tujlapur Police Station. So it appears that presently, Crime No. 398 of 2020 registered with Tujlapur Police Station for offence punishable under sections 394, 427, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, is pending against appellant.

¶24

In the FIR, general allegations are levelled against appellant that he, along with Sushant, Vishwajit and two unknown persons, assaulted informant with fist and kick blows and with beer bottle. Considering the nature of allegations made against him and the injury certificate of the informant, it is clear that informant has suffered two Contused Lacerated Wounds on head, which are attributable to accused Ganesh. Broken pieces of one beer bottle were recovered from the spot of incident. Prima facie , therefore, it appears that assault was made with one beer bottle, which is already recovered.

¶25

Appellant was arrested on 2^nd February, 2024 and he was remanded to police custody till 9^th February, 2024 and thereafter he is remanded to Magisterial Custody.

¶26

{4}

¶27

criapel218-24.doc

¶28

In the present crime, accused No.2 Sushant and accused No.4 Vishwajit are also arrested along with appellant.

¶29

Taking into consideration general nature of allegations made against appellant and the injuries mentioned in injury certificate and since appellant is arrested on 2^nd February, 2024, he need not be detained for indefinite period. Investigation is in progress and accused No.1 is yet to be arrested.

¶30

Appellant is permanent resident of Bhosale Galli, Tujjapur and he is not likely to abscond if released on bail.

¶31

In the result, following order-

¶32

ORDER

¶33

A. Appeal is allowed.

¶34

B. Appellant be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 521 of 2023 registered with Tujjapur Police Station, District - Dharashiv for offence punishable under sections 307, 324, 143, 147, 149, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code, u/s 3/25 of Arms Act and under sections 3 (1) (a), 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (s), 3 (2) (va) and 148 of the Atrocities Act, on executing Personal Bond and Surety Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount.

¶35

{5} criapel218-24.doc

¶36

C. Until further orders, appellant shall not enter Shukrawar Peath area of Tujlapur wherein informant resides.

¶37

D. Appellant shall not, in any manner, try to contact and / or influence prosecution witnesses.

¶38

E. Appellant shall not tamper prosecution evidence.

¶39

[NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI] JUDGE

¶40

drp/criapel218-24.doc

Lakhan Rohidas Bhosale v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lakhan Rohidas Bhosale v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

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

Vijay @ Dharuji Babasaheb Gaikwad Vs Sheetal W/O Vijay Gaikwad and Others

Mahesh Vitthal Wagh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sandeep Marotrao Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Pradip Eknath Kulkarni Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kamal W/O Digmabar Chaudhari and Others Vs Pradip Eknath Kulkarni and Others

Mahadev Satyabhan Thoke Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others