Dismissed¶41

Prashant Kashinath Zaware v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC27 Mar 2025ABA/412/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail dismissed; Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench; Arun R. Pedneker J.; 27-03-2025; Sanket Shivaji Khose; Prashant Kashinath Zaware; FIR No.0917/2024 Parner Police Station Ahmednagar; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 ss.109, 118(1), 119(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2)(3), 126(2), 324(4), 49, 140(2); contract to kidnap and kill; supplementary statement 02/01/2025; belated FIR; call recordings transcript; video forwarded to applicants; accused No.1 Ketan Phapale arrested; grave offence; preliminary stage of investigation; Criminal Application 1103/2025 to assist APP allowed.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the applicants: anticipatory bail refused and ABA/417/2025 and ABA/412/2025 dismissed. Criminal Application No. 1103 of 2025 (to assist the learned APP) allowed and disposed of. ¶41

Prashant Kashinath Zaware Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the applicants: anticipatory bail refused and ABA/417/2025 and ABA/412/2025 dismissed. Criminal Application No. 1103 of 2025 (to assist the learned APP) allowed and disposed of.

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants (Sanket Shivaji Khose and Prashant Kashinath Zaware), whose names surfaced only in the informant's supplementary statement dated 02/01/2025 alleging they gave contract to accused No.1 to kidnap and kill the informant, are entitled to anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.0917/2024 of Parner Police Station.

¶30

Court's answer

Considering the nature of the allegations, the preliminary stage of the investigation, and the recorded conversations between the applicants and accused No.1, the Court found prima facie that the applicant is involved in a grave offence, and therefore no case is made out for granting anticipatory bail.

¶41

Ratio / Principle

Criminal Application No.1103 of 2025, filed to assist the learned APP, is allowed and disposed of.

¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (Arun R. Pedneker, J.), March 27, 2025: Anticipatory bail applications ABA/417/2025 (Sanket Shivaji Khose) and ABA/412/2025 (Prashant Kashinath Zaware) DISMISSED. The applicants apprehended arrest in FIR No.0917/2024 dated 27/12/2024 of Parner Police Station, Taluka Parner, District Ahmednagar, for offences under Sections 109, 118(1), 119(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2)(3), 126(2), 324(4), 49 and 140(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Their names did not appear in the FIR (lodged four days after the 23/12/2024 incident) but surfaced in the informant's supplementary statement dated 02/01/2025, alleging they gave contract to accused No.1 (Ketan Phapale) to kidnap and kill the informant. The learned APP pointed to witness statements, the arrest of accused No.1, recovery of his mobile phone containing recorded conversations with the applicants about assaulting the informant (transcript produced), and a video of the incident forwarded by accused No.1 to the applicants. Considering the nature of allegations, the preliminary stage of investigation and the recorded conversations, the Court held prima facie that the applicants were involved in a grave offence and no case for anticipatory bail was made out. Criminal Application No. 1103 of 2025 in ABA/417/2025 (Vikas Vishwnath Phapale, filed to assist the learned APP) was allowed and disposed of.

¶1

2025:BHC-AUG:9110

¶2

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

924 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 417 OF 2025

¶4

Sanket Shivaji Khose

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

The State Of Maharashtra And Others

¶7

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Kakade Amol Narhari APP for Respondents-State: Mr. G. O. Wattamwar Advocate for Assist to APP : Mr. G. R. Syed

¶8

WITH

¶9

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 412 OF 2025

¶10

Prashant Kashinath Zaware

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

The State Of Maharashtra And Another

¶13

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Narwade Narayan B. APP for Respondents-State : Mr. G. O. Wattamwar

¶14

WITH

¶15

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1103 OF 2025 IN ABA/417/2025

¶16

Vikas Vishwnath Phapale

¶17

VERSUS

¶18

The State Of Maharashtra And Another

¶19

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Syed G R APP for Respondents-State: Mr. G. R. Syed

¶20

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

¶21

Dated : March 27, 2025.

¶22

PER COURT :-

¶23

Criminal Application No.1103 of 2025 is filed to assist the learned APP. The said application is allowed and disposed of.

¶24

The applicants in ABA/417/2025 and ABA/412/2025 have approached this Court apprehending arrest in connection with FIR No.0917/2024, dated 27/12/2024, registered with Parner Police Station, Taluka Parner, District

¶25

Page 1 of 4

¶26

924 ABA 417-2025

¶27

Ahmednagar, for offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(1), 119(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 189(2), 190, 191(2)(3), 126(2), 324(4), 49, and 140(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶28

The FIR was registered on 27/12/2024 on the complaint of the informant, who alleged that on 23/12/2024 at about 7:45 p.m., while he was traveling by car towards Gargundi village via Gargundi Fata, accused No.1, Ketan Phapale, overtook his vehicle and stopped ahead. Near Chand Pathan’s field, accused No.1 intercepted the informant, and four other accused persons alighted from the vehicle, verbally abused him, and threatened that two persons have given contract to the accused No.1 to kidnap and kill him.

¶29

The supplementary statement of the informant was recorded on 02/01/2025, wherein he reiterated his allegations and gave names of the above applicants as the persons who had given contract to accused No.1 to kidnap and eliminate him.

¶30

In light of the supplementary statement, the applicants have filed the present application for anticipatory bail.

¶31

The learned Counsel for the applicants submits that their names do not appear in the FIR. The FIR itself was lodged belatedly after four days.

¶32

Page 2 of 4

¶33

924 ABA 417-2025

¶34

The applicants’ names were only disclosed later in the supplementary statement recorded on 02/01/2025, wherein it was alleged that they had instigated the assault and that charges related to kidnapping and attempted to murder were invoked against them.

¶35

It is further submitted that the applicants had no active participation in the offence, and their involvement is based solely on the supplementary statement of the informant. Therefore, considering the lack of direct role, the applicants seek protection by way of anticipatory bail.

¶36

On the other hand, the learned APP opposes the application, arguing that the FIR itself records that before assaulting the informant, the accused No.1 stated that two persons had given him a contract to kidnap and kill the informant. Further, statements of witnesses have been recorded, in which they have stated that they heard accused No.1 stating that the applicants have given contract to kidnap and eliminate the informant on account of interference in the construction business.

¶37

The learned APP further submits that accused No.1 has already been arrested, and his mobile phone has been recovered. The call records retrieved from his mobile contain recordings of conversations between accused No.1 and the applicants, discussing how the informant was to be assaulted. The transcript of these conversations has been produced before

¶38

Page 3 of 4

¶39

924 ABA 417-2025

¶40

me. Additionally, it is submitted that accused No.1 recorded a video of the incident and forwarded it to the applicants.

¶41

Considering the nature of the allegations, the preliminary stage of the investigation, and the recorded conversations between the applicants and accused No.1, prima facie it is seen that the applicant is involved in grave offence as such no case is made out for granting anticipatory bail. In view of the same, ABA/417/2025 and ABA/412/2025 stand dismissed.

¶42

( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. )

¶43

vj gawade/-.

¶44

Page 4 of 4

Prashant Kashinath Zaware v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Kashinath Zaware 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

Alka W/O Santosh Khandare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Anju W/O Sudhir Katke Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Siyya W/O Rahul Chandnani Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Sutradhar Laxman Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Gaurav Sunil Tiwari Vs the Superintendent of Police and Another

Gahininath Umesh Saindane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another