Allowed

Ashok Shankar Shinde v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC15 Mar 2024BA/2102/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a regular bail application under Section 439 CrPC, the High Court of Bombay granted bail to the applicant, who was accused of grievous hurt, finding prima facie substance in his submission that the incident occurred in a heat of moment and noting no risk of flight.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 20,000/ with one or two local solvent sureties.

Ashok Shankar Shinde Vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

904 BA 2102 of 2023.doc

¶2

BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

Digitally signed by BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Date: 2024.03.15 18:22:07 +0530

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2102 OF 2023

¶6

Ashok Shankar Shinde

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶10

Mr. Yogesh Patil, Advocate/s, for the Applicant.
Ms. S.S. Kaushik, APP, for Respondent- State.

¶11

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 15th March 2024

¶12

P. C.

¶13

1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Counsel for the Applicant and Ms.

¶14

Kaushik, learned APP for the Respondent-State.

¶15

2. This regular Bail Application is preferred under Section 439 of the

¶16

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the Applicant who is Accused

¶17

No.1. The relevant details are as follows:-

¶18

`1. C.R. No.`	`116 of 2023`
`2. Date of registration of F.I.R.`	`28th March 2023`
`3. Name of Police Station`	`Wadgaon Nimbalkar, Pune Rural`
`4. Section/s invoked`	`307, 324, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323,` `504 and 506 ofI.P.C., 1860;`
`5. Date of incident`	`26th March 2023`
`6. Date of arrest`	`18th April 2023`
`7. Date of filing Charge-sheet`	`14th June 2023`

¶19

 Page No. 1/4

¶20

Dusane

¶21

904 BA 2102 of 2023.doc

¶22

3.The prosecution case is that the Applicant-Ashok Shankar Shinde

¶23

and the Injured-Anna Shankar Shinde are siblings. As per the
prosecution case, the inured was driving his tractor on the land outside
the residence of the Applicant. At that time, the Applicant told the
injured that the said place exclusively belongs to him and the injured
told the Applicant that the said land is their ancestral land and therefore
the incident took place. There are total 6 Accused. Accused Nos.2 and 3
are the sons of Accused No.1 and the Injured persons are relatives of the
Accused and the other Accused persons are the respective wives of the
Accused Nos.1, 2, and 3.

¶24

4.Mr. Patil, learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that there
are cross complaints filed by the Applicant as well as the informant. The
alleged dispute is over use of a pathway on the ancestral land of the
Accused brothers. Investigation is complete and the Applicant is in
custody since April 2023. He submitted that all male members of the
family are incarcerated. He submitted that the incident in question took
place on the spur of the moment. He submitted that there are no
criminal antecedents.

¶25

5.On the other hand, Ms. Kaushik, learned A.P.P. vehemently
opposed the Bail Application and submitted that there are eye-witnesses
to the incident. There are injuries which are grievous in nature and
therefore, Bail Application be rejected.

¶26

 Page No. 2/4

¶27

Dusane

¶28

904 BA 2102 of 2023.doc

¶29

6.Perusal of record shows that the incident in question took place
on 26th March 2022, F.I.R. was lodged on 28th March 2023 and the
Applicant was arrested on 18th April 2023. There are total 6 Accused
and three have already been granted bail.

¶30

7.Prima facie, there is substance in the contention of Mr. Patil,
learned Counsel for the Applicant that the incident took place on the
spur of the moment. There are cross complaints.

¶31

8. The Applicant does not appear to be at risk of flight.

¶32

9. The Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents.

¶33

10.Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by imposing
conditions.

¶34

11.In view thereof, the following order:-

¶35

O R D E R

¶36

(a)The Applicant - Ashok Shankar Shinde be released on
bail in connection with C. R. No.116 of 2023 registered with
the Wadgaon Nimbalkar Police Station, Pune (Rural), District-
Pune on his furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs.20,000/- with one or
two local solventsureties in the like amount.

¶37

(b)On being released on bail, the Applicant shall furnish
his cell phone number and residential address to the
Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case
of any change thereto.

¶38

 Page No. 3/4

¶39

Dusane

¶40

904 BA 2102 of 2023.doc

¶41

(c)The Applicant shall report to the Wadgaon Nimbalkar

¶42

Police Station, Pune Rural, District - Pune on the first Sunday
of every month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. until the
conclusion of the trial.

¶43

(d)The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with
the facts of the case, so as to dissuade such a person from
disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.

¶44

(e)The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant
or any prosecution witness in any manner.

¶45

(f)The Applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The
Applicant shall co-operate with the Trial Court and shall not
seek unnecessary adjournments thereat.

¶46

(g)The Applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to
the Investigating Officer.

¶47

12.The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶48

13.It is clarified that the observations made herein are prima facie,
and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its merits, uninfluenced by
the observations made in this Order.

¶49

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶50

 Page No. 4/4

¶51

Dusane

Ashok Shankar Shinde v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Shankar Shinde v. State of Maharashtra

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

Munir @Munna Mehboob Shaikh Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

R.K. Rai (in Person) Vs Himani Maity and Ors.

Kamalkishor Babulal Arya Vs State of Maharashtra

Viva Divine Ventures vs Madhu Jeevan Jyoti Co-Operative Housing Society Limited

Maria Artemia Gomes vs Grievances Redressal Committee and Others

Mukund Shantaram Nakashe and Anr. vs Sterlite Technologies Limited