Allowed¶18

Parmeshwar Shrikrishna Lahudkar v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Police Station Officer Ps Khamgaon Dist Buldhana

Bombay HC19 Nov 2025APEAL/505/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail - ad-interim protection granted where the FIR discloses no allegation against the applicant, whose name appears only through his brothers; offences under BNS 2023 ss. 351(2), 351(3), 333, 352 r/w 3(5) and SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ss. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va); alleged caste insult; Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench; notice returnable after Diwali Vacation 2025.

What did the court decide?

Ad-interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; notice issued to the non-applicants, returnable after Diwali Vacation, 2025; learned APP waived notice for non-applicant No.1/State. ¶18

Parmeshwar Shrikrishna Lahudkar vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Police Station Officer Ps Khamgaon Dist Buldhana — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Ad-interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant; notice issued to the non-applicants, returnable after Diwali Vacation, 2025; learned APP waived notice for non-applicant No.1/State.

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the First Information Report in Crime No. 195/2025 discloses any allegation against the applicant, whose name appears therein only on account of his brothers. +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

On going through the First Information Report, the Court found that the applicant's name is mentioned therein only because of his brothers Shrikrushna Lahudkar and Gajanan Lahudkar.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Nothing is disclosed in the First Information Report against the applicant.

¶18

Key takeaways

Accordingly, the Court held that the applicant is protected and granted ad-interim anticipatory bail.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench), Criminal Appeal No. 505/2025 - Parmeshwar s/o Shrikrishna Lahudkar v. State of Maharashtra thr. P.S.O., P.S. Khamgaon (Rural), Dist. Buldhana and another (Coram: Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi, J.; decided 13.10.2025). The applicant was arraigned in Crime No. 195/2025 of Khamgaon Rural Police Station, District Buldhana, for offences under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 333 and 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, on allegations of insulting the caste of the complainant amid a dispute between the two families. Reading the FIR, the Court found that the applicant's name was mentioned only because of his brothers Shrikrushna Lahudkar and Gajanan Lahudkar, and that nothing was recorded against the applicant personally. Holding that nothing was there in the First Information Report against the applicant, the Court granted ad-interim anticipatory bail, issued notice to the non-applicants returnable after Diwali Vacation, 2025, and recorded the learned APP's waiver of notice for the State.

¶1

41 appeal 505-2025.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.505/2025

¶5

Parmeshwar s/o Shrikrishna Lahudkar

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State of Maharashtra thr. P.S.O., P.S. Khamgaon (Rural), Dist. Buldhana and another

¶8

¶9

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders

¶10

Court's or Judge's orders

¶11

¶12

Shri V.T. Suryawanshi, Advocate for appellant Shri C.A. Lokhande, APP for non-applicant No.1/State

¶13

CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J. DATE : 13.10.2025

¶14

The applicant is arrested in Crime No.195/2025 registered at Khamgaon Rural Police Station, District Buldhana for the offences punishable under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 333 and 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1) (s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989. The allegations made against the applicant are about insulting the caste of the complainant. There is dispute between the family of applicant and complainant. The guest came in the house of complainant had urinated in front of the house of the applicant and, therefore, the allegations are made that he had used insulting words for the caste of the complainant and, therefore, offence is registered.

¶15

41 appeal 505-2025.odt

¶16

¶17

After going through the First Information Report, it appears that the name of this applicant is mentioned only because of the brother of the applicant namely Shrikrushna Lahudkar and Gajanan Lahudkar. Nothing is mentioned against the applicant that he had used the words or anything happened with the applicant.

¶18

Nothing is there in First Information Report against the applicant. Hence, the applicant is protected by granting ad-interim anticipatory bail.

¶19

Issue notice to the non-applicants, returnable after Diwali Vacation, 2025.

¶20

Learned APP waives notice for non-applicant No.1/ State.

¶21

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI J.)

¶22

R.S. Sahare

¶23

Signed by: Mrs. Ranjana Sahare Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 14/10/2025 18:27:39

Parmeshwar Shrikrishna Lahudkar v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Police Station Officer Ps Khamgaon Dist Buldhana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmeshwar Shrikrishna Lahudkar v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Police Station Officer Ps Khamgaon Dist Buldhana

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Swami Dhyan Chatyana Maharaj (Secty.)Shri Swami Atmachaitanya Vishveshwar Trust, Wardha and 2 Other vs Shri Kiran Balwantrao Deshmukh and Others

Sahebrao Uttam Maliye vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso. Ps. Durgapur, Dist. Chandrapr

Sudhakar Himmat Patil Vs Asant Lahu Patil

Namdeo Sitaram Wagh vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Ansing Dist Washim and Anr.

Somnath Baburao Mustapure Vs Rahemat Maheboob Sahikh and Others

Mahadeo Krishnaji Chikate (Died) Thr His Lrs Laxmibai and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.