Rahul Gokul Yadav and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra

Learned counsel for applicants submitted that, applicants are arrested in above crime on 14.08.2024. That, there is false implication. That, there are mere allegation of causing fracture by means of wooden log. That, now investigation is over and whatever recovery is already recovered. That, charge sheet is already filed in November 2024. Therefore, when no further recovery or discovery is to be made and as applicants are ready to abide all and any conditions imposed by this court, learned counsel seeks grant of bail.

Learned APP as well as learned counsel for informant, both have strongly opposed on the ground that, there is use of two sickles and wooden log. Presents applicants are also named. Learned counsel for informant pointed out that, injured suffered fractured to skull and one skull bone was required to be removed. He further pointed out that, there are other grievous injuries and moreover two accused and associates of accused is at large and for above reasons, application is opposed.

BA.18.2025

-3-

Heard. Perused the papers. Informant Prakash has reported that, on 02.08.2024, around 8.30 a.m., he and his parents were busy in agricultural activity in their field. That time, his neighbour Rahul Yadav i.e. present applicant carved the ridge (bandh) and let the water in the field of informant and this was questioned. It is reported that, after abusing and threatening, Rahul Yadav i.e. present applicant went and returned around 9.45 a.m. along with Krushna Yadav (present applicant no.2), Gokul Yadav, Narbada Yadav and Anil Angad and they all came with articles like sticks, axe and sickle and mounted attack on informant and his mother. Injury certificates to which attention of this court is invited shows that, there are three grievous injuries suffered by informant on left parieto occipital region, left eye and left knee. Mother of injured, who is 60 years old, has also suffered two fracture injuries and one CLW and both injuries said to be grievous in nature.

Taking the above accusations into consideration and nature of allegations, this court does not find it a fit case for grant of bail.

7. The application is rejected.

(ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.)

Tandale

Rahul Gokul Yadav and Another v. the State of Maharashtra