Subhash Suresh Chaware vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Khamgaon Gramin, Dist. Buldhana

Apprehending the arrest, the applicant/original accused no. 2 has preferred this application for the grant of anticipatory bail in connection with First Information Report/Crime No. 42/2026, dated 05/02/2026, registered with Police Station Khamgaon (Rural), District Buldhana for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 324(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNS’) and Sections 21(1) & 21(2) of Minerals and Mines Act. The FIR was registered at the instance of informantGanesh Suresh Sangale.

¶12

In short, it is alleged in the FIR that, when the informant who was occupying the post of Jr. Engineer at Man Project, he found that some Murum was excavated and loaded in two Tractors. The spot of incident was near the agricultural field of one Narayan Amruta Gawhale. When the flying squad visited the spot, they found one JCB Machine on the spot, whereas the two Tractors were driven away by the Drivers and therefore, they could not

¶13

2 24) ABA 199-2026.odt

¶14

be seized. On necessary enquiry, the informant came to know that one of the Tractors was of Sonalika Company and owned by the present applicant.

¶15

In this background, learned counsel for the applicant has contended that, the FIR is bereft of any details regarding the vehicle involved qua the present applicant. He submitted that, neither the applicant was present on the spot nor the Drivers who were allegedly driving the Tractors, were arrested. According to him, the Tractors were not found on the spot. Thus, he requested to allow the present application.

¶16

Per contra, Learned APP for the State has contended that the eye witness to the incident has categorically stated that, the excavation of Murum was carried out with the help of JCB Machine and the Murum was loaded in two Tractors. According to the eye witness, one of the Tractors was of Sonalika Company and was owned by the present applicant. He therefore, requested for rejection of the application.

¶17

I have gone through the record of the case. The FIR was registered on 05/02/2026, whereas the incident in question had taken place on 21/01/2026. A delay in lodging the FIR is not explained by the investigating agency. Even otherwise, neither the applicant was present on the spot, nor the Tractors were found on the spot. The prosecution, through the investigating agency, has not made any effort to show that the applicant was the owner of the Tractor which was of Sonalika Company. This Court

¶18

3 24) ABA 199-2026.odt

¶19

vide order dated 13/03/2026 had granted ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicant, with a direction to him to attend the concerned police station. The applicant submits that he has attended the concerned police station, which fact is not countered by the Learned APP.

¶20

In view of the aforesaid discussion and considering the fact that, the Murum and JCB Machine are already seized, I am inclined to pass following Order :-

¶21

ORDER

¶22

i) The Criminal Application (ABA) is allowed .

¶23

ii) The order passed by this Court dated 13/03/2026, granting ad-interim anticipatory bail, is confirmed.

¶24

iii) In the event of arrest, in connection with Crime No. 42/2026, dated 05/02/2026, registered with Police Station Khamgaon (Rural), District Buldhana for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2), 324(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 21(1) & 21(2) of Minerals and Mines Act., the applicant shall be released on furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs. 55,000/- (Rupees Fifty Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount.

¶25

iv) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on 25^th , 26^th and 27^th of April, 2026, between 12.00 p.m. to 02.00 p.m. and thereafter, as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

¶26

v) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution

¶27

4 24) ABA 199-2026.odt

¶28

evidence or influence the witnesses and remain present on each and every date of the Trial.

¶29

vi) The applicant shall not leave the India without prior permission of the Court.

¶30

vii) Accordingly, the Application stands disposed of .

¶31

(RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.)

¶32

B.T.K.

¶33

Signed by: Mr. B.T. Khapekar Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 17/04/2026 20:25:12

Subhash Suresh Chaware v. State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Khamgaon Gramin, Dist. Buldhana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Suresh Chaware v. State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Khamgaon Gramin, 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

Lokesh Madanmohan Yelne vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Tah and Dist. Bhandara

Varsha W/O Umesh Nikam vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Dhad, Dist. Buldhana

Pushpak S/O Kishore Patle vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Deoli, Dist. Wardha

Nawed Khan Ahmad Khan vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Darwha, Tq. Darwha Dist. Yavatmal

Rameshwar Ramesh Petle vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Gadgenagar, Amravati City Dist Amravati

Yousuf Khan S/O Mohammad Mahboob vs State of Maharashtra Thr Pso Ps Gittikhadan, Nagpur