Mahadev Bhimrao Shinde v. The State Of Maharashtra

(43) ABA 1300-21

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Amk ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1300 OF 2021 Mr. Mahadev Bhimrao Shinde .. Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. Amol Patankar for the Applicant.

Ms. Anamika Malhotra, APP for the Respondent-State. PSI Shital Jadhav, Ghatkopar Police Station present.

CORAM

: PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

DATE : 11th JUNE, 2021.

P. C. :

1.

This is an application for anticipatory bail in C. R. No. 175/2021 registered with Ghatkopar Police Station for the offence under Sections 326, 324, 323, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant has alleged that on 14.04.2021 on account of dispute regarding money transaction, the applicant and the other accused had assaulted him and others. The applicant had allegedly assaulted the complainant with fist blows, pulled him down and the other accused have also assaulted. The applicant had also assaulted daughter-in-law of the complainant. The accused were armed with iron rod and sickle. The complainant had sustained injuries to his head and hand. 2.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the dispute is amongst family members. The complainant is related to the applicant. The applicant had also sustained injury. The complaint from the side of the applicant was not recorded by the police. There are no criminal antecedents of the applicant. No injury was sustained by the daughterin-law of the complainant. 3.

Learned APP placed on record the photographs of injuries sustained by the complainant and daughter-in-law of the complainant, 1/2

(43) ABA 1300-21 grandson and grand-daughter of the complainant were also allegedly assaulted and both had sustained injuries.

4.

On perusal of the aforesaid documents, it is apparent that the incident is of serious nature. The report of the police also indicates that two cases are also registered against the applicant in the past vide C.R. Nos. 10/2013 and 336/2016.

5.

In the light of aforesaid factual aspects, no case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. The application stands rejected. [PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.] 2/2