Arun Vyankat Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC20 Feb 2025ABA/119/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Arun Vyankat Patil v. The State of Maharashtra; Anticipatory Bail Application No. 119 of 2025; High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad; decided 20.02.2025 by Arun R. Pedneker, J.; FIR No. 0585/2024, Amalner Police Station, District Jalgaon; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 140(3), 126(2), 127(2), 115, 351, 352; interim protection of 05.02.2025 confirmed; application allowed with conditions; no precedents discussed.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection (anticipatory bail) granted on 05.02.2025 confirmed, subject to conditions: attendance at the police station once a fortnight for four months; no tampering with prosecution evidence and no influencing of informant/witnesses; co-operation with the investigation and trial proceedings; protection liable to cancellation on breach. ¶¶28

Arun Vyankat Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, apprehending arrest in FIR No. 0585/2024 (Amalner Police Station, District Jalgaon) for offences under sections 140(3), 126(2), 127(2), 115, 351 and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is entitled to anticipatory bail / confirmation of the interim protection granted on 05.02.2025.

¶¶11

Court's answer

Considering the nearly completed investigation and that no serious injury was sustained by the informant, the Court held that no further custodial interrogation of the applicant was necessary.

¶¶19

Ratio / Principle

The application is allowed and the interim protection granted by this Court on 05.02.2025 is confirmed on specified terms.

¶¶20

Key takeaways

Condition: the applicant shall attend the police station once a fortnight for a period of four months.ratio¶¶21
Conditions: the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution, shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned, and shall co-operate with the investigation and the proceedings before the trial Court (see also ¶25).ratio¶¶24
Violation of any of the conditions will render the protection liable to cancellation.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — applicant apprehended arrest in FIR No. 0585/2024 dated 16.12.2024 (Amalner Police Station, District Jalgaon) for offences under sections 140(3), 126(2), 127(2), 115, 351 and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — allegation of abduction and assault of the informant connected to elopement of the applicant's grand-daughter with the informant's brother — interim protection granted 05.02.2025; applicant attended police station, car seized, investigation nearly completed, no serious injury to informant — interim protection confirmed and application allowed, subject to fortnightly reporting for four months and standard non-tampering/co-operation conditions (Pedneker, J., 20.02.2025).

¶1

1 of 3 936-ABA.119.2025

¶2

2025:BHC-AUG:4917

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

936 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 119 OF 2025

¶5

ARUN VYANKAT PATIL VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶7

Mr. Abhaykumar Dilip Ostwal, Advocate for Applicant. Ms. Preeti V. Diggikar, APP for Respondents-State.

¶8

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 20.02.2025

¶9

P.C.:-

¶10

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

¶11

2] The applicant has approached this Court apprehending arrest in connection with FIR No.0585/2024 dated 16.12.2024 registered with Amalner Police Station, District Jalgaon for the offences punishable under sections 140(3), 126(2), 127(2), 115, 351 and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶12

3] This Court by order dated 05.02.2025 granted interim protection to the applicant. Considering the submissions and reasons given in paragraph Nos.3, 4 and 5 as under:-

¶13

“3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 14/12/2024, at about 05:00 p.m., the informant had gone to Tadepura, Amalner, to attend a marriage ceremony. While returning home at around 09:30 p.m., the applicant and four unknown persons were present in a white car. One of them forcefully held the informant’s hand and pulled him inside the car, and took him to Dhule and Nashik. 4. Meanwhile, the informant was beaten by all of them with fists and kicks and was also threatened. They were questioning

¶14

Tauseef

¶15

2 of 3 936-ABA.119.2025

¶16

him about the grand-daughter of the applicant and the informant’s brother, who had taken the applicant’s grand-daughter with him for getting married. The informant was detained in a stall by those persons. It is alleged that the applicant kidnapped the informant to ascertain the whereabouts of his brother as well as his grand-daughter, and thereafter released him.

¶17

The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant will cooperate with the investigation. Considering the background of the case, the applicant is granted interim protection.”

¶18

4] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that in pursuance of the order dated 05.02.2025 passed by this Court, the applicant has attended the concern police station and cooperative with the investigation. The learned counsel further submits that car is seized and the investigation in the matter is almost completed. He submits that no further custodial interrogation of the applicant would require.

¶19

5] Considering the submissions and the facts that the alleged incident is on account of grand-daughter of the applicant having eloped with the brother of the first informant. Considering the background and the investigation is nearly completed, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary. No serious injury is sustained by the informant. Thus, the said interim protection granted to the applicant by order dated 05.02.2025 stand confirmed.

¶20

6] In view of the above, the application is allowed and interim protection granted by this Court on 05.02.2025 is confirmed on the following terms :

¶21

i] The applicant shall attend the police station once a fortnight for a period for four months from today.

¶22

Tauseef

¶23

3 of 3 936-ABA.119.2025

¶24

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.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

8] 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.

¶28

9] The application stands disposed of.

¶29

(ARUN R. PEDNEKER) JUDGE

¶30

Tauseef

Arun Vyankat Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Vyankat Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Namdeo Rode Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Karan Ratan Choure Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Gulab Dnyanobarao Wagh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Navnath Abu Divate Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sanjay Narayan Sapdhare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ejaz Kha Gultaj Khan Mewati and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra