Prem Piraji Ragde and Others vs the State of Maharashtra

The Applicant No.1 has approached this Court, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.541/2025 registered with Parbhani Gramin Police Station, District Parbhani for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 189(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190, 118(2), 352, 324(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶17

It is case of prosecution that while the informant Anil Pralhad More was taking treatment in the Government Hospital, Parbhani on 3/10/2025, the police have recorded his statement. On its basis, police have registered above crime. He alleged that on 3/10/2025 his brother Kiran More has told him that on 1/10/2025

¶18

2 945.ABA-1980-2025.doc

¶19

he had been to Dikshabhumi, Nagpur. At that time, petty quarrel had taken place between him and Pravin Ragde. Akash More came to settle the quarrel but Pravin Ragde has beaten him by slaps and fists. Informant further alleged that on 3/10/2025 at about 3.30 p.m. his brother Kiran More has made him phone call and informed that i) Pravin Ragde, ii) Mahendra Ragde, iii) Papa Ragde, iv) Piraji Ragde, v) Balaji Ragde and vi) Prem Ragde are beating to Shrikant Dhwale by means of iron rod, Iron Punch and stick. Therefore, informant went towards the spot near Zilla Parishad School, Zari. At that time informant has seen that Pravin Ragde was beating to Kiran and Shrikant by means of iron rod. Mahendra Ragde by means of iron punch, Balaji Ragde by means of iron rod and Papa, Piraji & Prem by means of stick were assaulting them. Informant tried to rescue them but Pravin Ragde has hit iron rod on head of informant. Dipak More and Akash More came to rescue quarrel but Balaji Ragde has by means of iron rod assaulted Informant and witnesses with intent to commit their murder.

¶20

The learned Counsel for the Applicants submits that this Court, vide interim order dated 13.11.2025, was pleased to protect the Applicant No.1 by granting ad-interim bail with a condition to attend the Investigating Officer and to cooperate with the investigation. The learned Counsel for the Applicants submits that the Applicant No.1 has duly attended the police station and has cooperated with the Investigating Officer as directed by this Court. The learned Counsel submits that Applicant No.1 has been

¶21

3 945.ABA-1980-2025.doc

¶22

deliberately roped into the present crime only by way of counterallegations, as an earlier FIR was filed at the behest of the real brother of the Applicant, being FIR No.400/2025 dated 04.10.2025, for the same incident dated 03.10.2025. The present complainant, Anil Pralhad, is accused No.1 in the said FIR and is alleged to have assaulted the family members of the Applicants by means of a sword and other dangerous weapons.

¶23

The learned Counsel for the Applicants further submits that Applicant No.1 was working at Bajaj Finance at the time of the incident and has CCTV footage to show that he was not present at the spot of the incident. Applicant No.1 has been deliberately implicated in the crime only to wreak vengeance against his entire family by way of a counter FIR. The Applicant No.1 is not having any criminal antecedents and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. As the Applicant No. 1/Prem Piraji Ragde has complied with the conditions imposed vide interim order dated 13.11.2025, the interim protection may be confirmed and he be released on anticipatory bail.

¶24

As against this, the learned APP strongly opposes the application on the ground that the Applicants are involved in serious offences of causing grievous hurt by means of a dangerous weapon and attempt to commit murder, which are punishable with life imprisonment. Applicant No.1 is directly named in the FIR, and hence this is not a fit case for granting anticipatory bail to Applicant

¶25

4 945.ABA-1980-2025.doc

¶26

No.1. Even though Applicant No.1 has cooperated with the investigation, the application deserves to be rejected.

¶27

I have gone through the investigation papers made available by the learned APP. A perusal of FIR being Crime No.400/2025 shows that the real brother of Applicant No.1 lodged an FIR against the complainant, Anil More, and his family members, and an offence of committing murder was registered on 04.10.2025, prior in point of time to the present FIR, which is FIR No.401/2025 registered at the behest of accused No.1/Anil More (the present complainant herein), against the entire family members of Applicant No.1. There are specific allegations of assault by means of a dangerous weapon, i.e., an iron rod, against accused Pravin Ragde and Balaji Piraji Ragde, who were already arrested in the said crime and released on bail vide order dated 10.02.2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Parbhani. It appears from the record that the charge-sheet has already been filed in the present crime. Hence, there remains nothing to be investigated as against the present Applicant No.1. The Applicant Nos. 2 to 4 were allowed to withdraw application vide order dated 13.11.2025. Since Applicant No.1 has cooperated with the investigation and has attended the police station and without going into the plea of alibi raised by the Applicant No.1, thus he can be protected by confirming the interim order. Hence the following order :

¶28

ORDER

¶29

( i ) The application is allowed insofar as Applicant No.1/Prem

¶30

5 945.ABA-1980-2025.doc

¶31

Piraji Ragde is concerned.

¶32

( ii ) The interim order dated 13.11.2025 is hereby confirmed.

¶33

( iii ) The Applicant No.1 shall attend the Parbhani Gramin Police Station, District Parbhani as and when called by the Investigating Officer for completion of the charge-sheet as regards the other absconding accused.

¶34

( iv ) The Applicant No.1 is directed not to tamper with the evidence.

¶35

( v ) The Applicant No.1 shall not threaten the complainant or the witnesses.

¶36

( vi ) The Applicant No.1 shall attend the trial on each and every date unless so exempted by the trial on emergency conditions.

¶37

( vii ) The Applicant No.1 shall submit his Aadhar and PAN Cards to the Investigating Officer and detailed addresses and phone numbers of himself and two of the near relatives.

¶38

( viii ) A single violation of the aforesaid conditions, would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail of the Applicant No.1 on that ground.

¶39

( ix ) With the aforesaid directions, the application is disposed of.

¶40

MEHROZ K. PATHAN JUDGE

¶41

NAJEEB..

Prem Piraji Ragde and Others v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prem Piraji Ragde and Others v. the State of Maharashtra

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

Sandip Sitaram Shinde vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bharat Baban Pawar and Another vs the State of Maharashtra

Vaibhav Vishnu Kale vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Vijay Uttam Avhad and Others vs the State of Maharashtra

Manisha Balaji Waghmare vs Prayas Alias Shanbhuraje Dattatraya Bhosale and Another

Mrigesh Dinkarrao Narwadkar (Ref. as Narwadkar in Fir) vs the State of Maharashtra and Another