Vishwajeet Randhir Rajput and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

1] Heard. For the reasons stated in the Criminal Application No. 549/2025 for assisting to the P.P., the same is allowed. Criminal Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶17

2] Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned APP for the respondent-State and learned counsel for assisting to P.P.

¶18

3] The applicants are apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 0004 of 2025, registered with Vaijapur Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad, for the offence

¶19

2

¶20

208.25ABA

¶21

punishable under Section 109, 126 (2), 324 (4), 189 (2), 191 (2), 191 (3), 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶22

4] This Court, by order dated 27.02.2025, has granted interim protection in favour of the applicants for the submissions and reasons stated in para nos. 3 to 6, as noted below :

¶23

3]It is alleged in the FIR that the
marriage of applicant no. 1 and daughter of the
brother of informant was arranged and due to
some reason, it was cancelled. It is further
alleged that on 03.01.2025, the wife of
informant told the informant that Sanjivani
Rajput from Vaijapur had kept offensive status
on her what’s app against the daughter of
brother of informant. Thereafter, the informant
along with brothers and wife went to Vaijapur
and asked the applicants about it. There was
altercation between them. It is further alleged
that at about 7.00 p.m. when the informant
along with his family were returning back, the
applicants along with other came in front of
car of informant and damaged his car. On the
basis of the said allegations, the FIR is
registered against the applicants. Thereafter
on 04.01.2025 the supplementary statement of
the informant was recorded and in the said
statement, it is stated that the informant
heard the sound of gun fire at the time of
incident and on the spot of incident, the
police found one empty bullet shell.

¶24

4]The learned counsel for the applicants
submits that there is prior dispute between the
parties, and therefore, there is improvement in
the supplementary statement recorded on
04.01.2025. Both the parties have filed NC
against each other.

¶25

5]Per contra, the learned APP submits that

¶26

3

¶27

208.25ABA

¶28

the applicant has used the gun and that gun
shell is found on the spot.

¶29

6]In the FIR, it is stated that the
applicant has damaged the car of the informant
and in the supplementary statement recorded on
04.01.2025 it is stated that the informant
heard the sound of gun fire at the time of
incident. There is no mention of gun fire in
the FIR. Considering the said fact, the usage
of gun appears doubtful.

¶30

5] The learned counsel for the applicants submits that in terms of the aforesaid order, the applicants have cooperated with the investigation.

¶31

6] The learned counsel for assist to P.P. submits that the presence of the applicants in the vicinity of the informant where the informant is residing may create further complication in the matter and the applicants may contact with the witnesses and may give threats to the informant.

¶32

7] In response, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants would not enter the village Talwani Sirsagaon, Taluka Kopargaon, District Ahmednagar till conclusion of the trial.

¶33

8] Considering this aspect of the matter and there is no material brought on record adverse to the applicants beyond the facts mentioned in order dated 27.02.2025, the interim protection granted by order dated 27.02.2025 stands confirmed, in the following terms :

¶34

4

¶35

208.25ABA

¶36

i] The applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and when required by the investigating officer.

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

9] In the event, the applicants violate any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be cancelled.

¶40

10] 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.

¶41

11] The application stands disposed of.

¶42

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE

¶43

DDC

Vishwajeet Randhir Rajput and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishwajeet Randhir Rajput and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Equitas Small Finance Bank through Officer Sagar Vinod Agrawal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vaishali Raju Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Karan Pundlik Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Manoj Dashrath Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Gulabrao Rangnath Jagtap and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shaikh Mujeebuddin Mohammad Shahbuddin Vs the State of Maharashtra