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

2] The applicants are apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.1298/2024, registered with Tophkhana Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar, for the offence punishable under Section 74, 333, 324 (4), 189 (2), 191, 191 (3), 190, 115 (2), 352, 351 (2), 351 (3), 191 (3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and subsequently added Section 8 and 12 of POSCO Act.

¶18

2

¶19

272.25ABA

¶20

3] This Court, by order dated 06.03.2025, has granted interim protection in favour of the applicants for the submissions and reasons stated in para nos. 3 and 4 as noted below :

¶21

3]On 11.12.2024, two NCs and two FIRs are
registered against one and another for the
similar offences i.e. for the offence
punishable under Sections 74, 333, 324 (4), 189
(2), 191, 191 (3), 190, 115 (2), 352, 351 (2),
351 (3), 191 (3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita. It appears from the record that the
statement of minor is recorded on 14.12.2024
and thereafter, after 3 days of the FIR the
offence under Section 8 and 12 of POCSO Act
have been added.

¶22

4]Considering that there are various NCs
and FIRs against one and another and after 15
days of registration of FIR, the offences under
Section 8 and 12 of POCSO Act have been added,
the possibility of over-implication cannot
ruled out.

¶23

4] The learned counsel for the applicants submits that in pursuance of the aforesaid order, the applicants have co-operated with the investigation. There are multiple FIRs between the parties.

¶24

5] The learned APP submits that in the order dated 06.03.2025 in para no.3 in line no.6, instead of ‘26.12.2024’, it should be ‘14.12.2024’ and in the same para in line no.6, instead of ‘15 days’, it should be ‘3 days’.

¶25

3

¶26

272.25ABA

¶27

6] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation in the FIR is that the applicant nos.2, 3 and 4 assaulted the daughter of the informant. There is no mention about assaulting the informant by applicant no.5. Thereafter, in the later statement, the allegations are made against the applicant no.5 that he has committed offence under Section 8 and 12 of the POSCO Act.

¶28

7] The learned counsel for assisting to the P.P. has produced photographs of the incident, in which, part of incident is seen of the quarrel between the parties in the balcony of the building.

¶29

8] The parties are neighbors and are on inimical terms. Considering the above facts, the possibility of overimplication cannot be ruled out. In view of the same, the interim protection granted by order dated 06.03.2025 stands confirmed, in the following terms :

¶30

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

¶31

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.

¶32

272.25ABA

¶33

4

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

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.

¶37

11] The application stands disposed of.

¶38

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE

¶39

DDC

Gulabrao Rangnath Jagtap and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulabrao Rangnath Jagtap and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

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

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

Shaikh Mujeebuddin Mohammad Shahbuddin Vs the State of Maharashtra