Abhishek Sanjay Yadav v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2025:BHC-AUG:5681

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 932 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 12 OF 2025 ABHISHEK SANJAY YADAV

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Kale Kunal Arvind APP for Respondent/State: Ms. Neha B. Kamble ...

...

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

DATE : 27.02.2025 P.C. :

1] Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State.

2] The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.566/2024, dated 27.09.2024, registered at Sangamner Talula Police Station, Sangamner, District Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 352, 351(2), 3(5), 115(2), 108 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3] This court granted interim protection to the applicant by order dated 16.01.2025 considering the submissions and reasons recorded in para 3 and 4, as under:

"3] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that

the allegation against the applicant is that he had an illicit relationship with the wife of the deceased, and although the applicant was asked to stay away from the wife of the deceased, the applicant continued relations with the wife of the deceased. This caused considerable stress to the deceased and he committed suicide. The learned counsel for the applicant relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Criminal Appeal No. 654 of 2017, decided on 03/10/2024, in the case of Nipun Aneja and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh., and submits that the applicants did not intend that the victim should commit suicide nor the action of the applicants was such.

4] Perusal of the allegations made prima facie, it cannot be said that the endeavor was made by the applicant to lead the consequences of the act i.e. suicide."

4] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has attended the concerned police station and cooperated with the investigation and that his mobile is also seized.

5] Considering that the applicant has cooperated with the investigation his further custodial interrogation would not be required, interim protection granted by order dated 16.01.2025 would be confirmed.

6] In view of the above, the interim protection granted by order dated 16.01.2025 stands confirmed, on the following terms:

i] The applicant shall attend the police station as

and when required by the Investigating Officer. ii] The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner. He shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case.

iii] The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and also in the proceedings before the trial Court.

7] In the event, the applicant violates any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be cancelled.

8] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present anticipatory bail application and the trial Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.

9] The application stands disposed of.

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE marathe