Abhijeet Ankush Pawar vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Abhijeet Ankush Pawar vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: in the event of arrest, the Applicant to be enlarged on bail on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.1,00,000/ with one or two sureties in the like amount; to report to the Investigating Officer at the concerned Police Station on the first Monday of every month between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 noon until filing of the charge-sheet and thereafter as and when called; to furnish particulars of address and mobile number to the Investigating Officer within one week; not to misuse liberty, influence the informant/witnesses or tamper with evidence; and to extend complete cooperation in the investigation. Interim Application No.79 of 2025 also disposed.

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the Applicant, Abhijeet Ankush Pawar, in connection with FIR No.1591 of 2024 registered with Kalwa Police Station, arising out of the election-eve incident of the intervening night of 19.11.2024 and 20.11.2024. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court granted anticipatory bail: weighing the role attributed to the Applicant in the FIR together with the circumstance that the Complainant's group took the law into their own hands by confronting the Applicant in his own office without approaching the Police Station, the Court stated it was inclined to grant the application for Anticipatory Bail, subject to conditions and cooperation with the Investigating Officer, with refraction entailing cancellation.

Ratio / Principle

On the attributed individual role, the Court recorded that the injured witness's statement (reproduced by the Trial Court at page No.33 of the Application) states that the Applicant used a fist blow on Ajay Kamble, and that thereafter some people with iron rods, bamboo and stones also caused injury to them.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Coram: MILIND N. JADHAV, J.; order dated 07.01.2025) allowed Anticipatory Bail Application No.17 of 2025 filed by Abhijeet Ankush Pawar in connection with FIR No.1591 of 2024 (Kalwa Police Station) for offences under Sections 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 118(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 read with Sections 37(1) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, arising from a clash between rival political groups at the Applicant's office at about 01:15 a.m. on the intervening night of 19.11.2024–20.11.2024, the eve of the assembly election held on 20.11.2024. The FIR attributed to the Applicant the infliction of a fist blow on injured Ajay Kamble, while the injured witness's statement records that some people with iron rods, bamboo and stones caused further injuries; the APP pointed to a grievous-injury chart in the Trial Court's order and submitted custody was needed to identify other accused. The Court noted that by common order dated 07.12.2024 below Exhibit-1 the Trial Court had granted conditional bail to one co-accused while refusing two others (including the Applicant), and laid stress on the fact that the Complainant's group took the law into their own hands by confronting the Applicant at his own office without approaching the Police Station. On that basis anticipatory bail was granted: release in the event of arrest on a P.R. Bond of Rs.1,00,000/ with one or two sureties in the like amount; monthly reporting to the Investigating Officer on first Mondays (10:00 a.m.–12:00 noon) until the charge-sheet and thereafter as called; address and mobile particulars to be furnished within one week; no misuse of liberty, influencing of informant/witnesses or tampering with evidence; and complete cooperation in investigation, any refraction entailing cancellation. Interim Application No.79 of 2025 stood disposed in view of the disposal of the Anticipatory Bail Application.

917.ABA.17.2025.doc

HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.17 OF 2025

Abhijeet Ankush Pawar .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.79 OF 2025

Mr. Vinay J. Bhanushali a/w. Mr. Nishant Dwivedi, Advocates for Applicant.

Ms. Akshata B. Desai, Advocate i/by Mr. Nitin Sejpal for Complainant.

Ms. Shilpa K. Gajare – Dhumal, APP for Respondent – State of Maharashtra.

API – Mr. S.N. Pimple, Kalwa Police Station, Thane City present.

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JANUARY 07, 2025

P.C.:

1. Heard Mr. Bhanushali, learned Advocate for Applicant; Ms.

Desai, learned Advocate for Complainant and Ms. Gajare – Dhumal, learned APP for Respondent – State of Maharashtra. Interim Application is not on board. It is taken up alongwith Bail Application.

2. Present Anticipatory Bail Application is filed in connection with First Information Report (FIR) No.1591 of 2024 registered with Kalwa Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 189(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 118(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “ BNS ”) read with Sections 37(1) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

3. The incident occurred on the prelude of the recent conducted

1 of 6

917.ABA.17.2025.doc

assembly elections on the intervening night of 19.11.2024 and 20.11.2024 at about 01:15 a.m. Both Applicant and First Informant – Complainant belong to two rival political groups. In the night of 19.11.2024, First Informant and his team learnt about distribution of money to the voters in the office of Applicant who was a supporter of a rival political party. Informant alongwith his group members namely Santosh Dhangar, Lucky Pawar, Adnan Syed, Ajay Kamble, Avinash Kamble, Sujal Kamble, Altaf Syed, Rohan Shinde and others arrived in two cars at office of Applicant situated at 90 Feet Road, Keshav Heights, Parsiknagar at about 01:15 a.m.

4. Election was held on 20.11.2024 and incident was on the night before election rather midnight. They observed that many people were present in the office of Applicant and one of the group member of Complainant namely Altaf Syed instructed all those who were present in the office of Applicant to leave the office. Thereafter when Applicant alongwith his group members was about to leave in their car after people had left the office of the Applicant they were abused and attacked in the process by the Complainant’s group. The scuffle which ensued thereafter related to hurling of stones, damaging the vehicle and two specific incidents attributable to the Applicant and one of his associate namely Mr. Rohan Kadu have been stated in the First Information Report (for short ‘ FIR ’). It is alleged that the Applicant assaulted one of the group member of Complainant by fist

2 of 6

917.ABA.17.2025.doc

blow. The FIR is appended at page Nos.25-A and 25-B and on perusing the same, same can be ascertained. Allegation against the mob which had gathered is to the effect that about 10 to 15 people attacked the group of Complainant with iron rods, bamboo sticks and stones. Needless to state that some of the injured received treatment in the Hospital pursuant to the incident. One of the member of the group of Complainant called Mr. Ajay Kamble received injury to his jaw as informed by Ms. Gajare – Dhumal, learned APP while opposing the Application but has fairly stated that it is not ascertained as to who carried out the attack and who beat whom. The fallacy in the present case is that the incident occurred in the office of Applicant but however Complainant and his associates – Mr. Ajay Kamble and Mr. Avinash Kamble were injured.

5. Ms. Gajare – Dhumal, learned APP would submit that the nature of the injury and act of the Applicant in causing the injury to Complainant’ associate is serious. She would submit that in that regard the written statement of four persons which has been recorded and appended to the Application be seen by Court which has been duly appreciated by the learned Trial Court while rejecting the common order passed below Exhibit-1 in common Bail Application filed by three of the Accused. She would submit that considering the fact that nature of injury is grievous which can be seen from the chart depicted in the order rejecting Bail Application which reflects the intention of

3 of 6

917.ABA.17.2025.doc

Applicant and his group members to take the life of Complaintant, she would submit that once it is prima facie seen that there were specific grievous injuries cause to the injured this Court to exercise restraint in granting Anticipatory Bail since the custody of Applicant would be required to identify of several other Accused involved in the act of committing the crime.

6. Ms. Gajare – Dhumal’s submissions are duly supported by Ms. Desai. She would persuade me to consider the injury certificate as also the photographs and would submit that grievous injury is caused to the injured and therefore Applicant deserves bail.

7. With their able assistance, I have perused the record. Applicant has come before the Court with a specific case. What is observed by Court is that when Bail Application of three Accused below Exhibit-1 was rejected by common order dated 07.12.2024, one Accused was granted Bail with conditions whereas two of the other Accused out of whom one is the present Applicant before me were rejected.

8. In so far Applicant - Abhijeet Ankush Pawar is concerned, FIR at page No.25-B clearly attributes role of Applicant to have inflicted fist blow on Ajay Kamble, one of the injured. Statement of said injured witness is reproduced by learned Trial Court at page No.33 of the Application. The underlined emphasis portion in the said

4 of 6

917.ABA.17.2025.doc

statement states that Applicant used fist blow on Ajay Kamble. Thereafter the statement proceeds by recording that some people with iron rods, bamboo and stones also caused injury to them. Considering the two aforesaid attributes and role of Applicant before me and more specifically and importantly the fact that Complainant in the present case took law into their own hands i.e. without approaching the Police Station they confronted the Applicant in his own office, I am inclined to grant the application for Anticipatory Bail. Needless to state that Applicant shall adhere by conditions for grant of Anticipatory Bail and provide all cooperation to the Investigating Officer. Any refraction shall entail to cancellation of this order and prosecution can approach this Court immediately for cancellation of the order. Hence, the following order:-

(i) In the event of the arrest, Applicant be enlarged on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/with one or two sureties in the like amount;

(ii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at concerned Police Station, on the first Monday of every month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon until filing of charge-sheet and thereafter as and when called for by the Investigating Officer for investigation;

(iii) Applicant shall furnish particulars of his address and

5 of 6

917.ABA.17.2025.doc

mobile number to the Investigating Officer within one

week from today;

(iv) Applicant shall not misuse his liberty in any manner or

influence the informant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case and he shall not tamper with the evidence; and

(v) It is directed that Applicant shall extend complete

cooperation in the investigation of the instant case.

9. In view of disposal of Anticipatory Bail Application, Interim Application, is also disposed.

10. Parties to act on a server copy of this order.

11. Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed and disposed.

H. H. SAWANT

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Digitally signed HARSHADA by HARSHADA HANUMANT HANUMANT SAWANT SAWANT Date: 2025.01.08 17:29:58 +0530

6 of 6