Vasant Laxmanrao Magar v. State Of Maharashtra

1 / 3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.911 OF 2024 Vasant Laxmanrao Magar .... Applicant versus State of Maharashtra .... Respondent .......

• Mr. Anilkumar K. Patil, Advocate for Applicant. • Ms. Poonam P. Bhosale, APP for the State/Respondent.

CORAM

: SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE : 05th APRIL, 2024 P.C. :

1.

The Applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with C.R.No.71/2023, dated 18/03/2023, registered with Vadivhare Police Station, Nashik Rural, under sections 307, 435, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 3 and 27 of the Arms Act.

2.

This is the second time that the Applicant has approached this Court for the same relief of anticipatory bail. On MANUSHREE NESARIKAR the previous occasion, he had preferred Anticipatory Bail MANUSHREE NESARIKAR Date: 2024.04.10 15:13:14 +0530 Nesarikar

2 / 3 Application No.1183/2023, which was rejected by a reasoned order on 29/02/2024. Thereafter, the Applicant had carried that order in Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No(s).3401/2024 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court passed the following order:

"

O R D E R

We are not inclined to interfere with the judgment(s) and order (s) passed by the High Court. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of."

3.

Thus, on the previous occasion, the Applicant's Anticipatory Bail Application was rejected on merits. Even the Hon'ble Supreme Court confirmed that order.

4.

Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that there is change in circumstance as the two accused are now released on regular bail and that the Applicant requires knee replacement surgery and he is suffering from heart issues. As far as health issues are concerned, the earlier order was passed on

3 / 3 29/02/2024. All these grounds were available to the Applicant. In any case, his health issues can be taken care of by the investigating agency.

5.

Considering the previous orders passed by this Court and also by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it will not be proper to entertain this application. The application is accordingly rejected.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)