Saurabh Baliram Rathod v. The State Of Maharashtra
2025:BHC-AUG:10984
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 946 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 494 OF 2025 SAURABH BALIRAM RATHOD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Yogesh K. Bobade APP for Respondent/State: Mr. N. R. Dayama ...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
DATE : 16.04.2025 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.0050/2025, dated 14.02.2025, registered at Talwada Police Station, Beed, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 303(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3] This court by order dated 27.03.2025 granted interim protection to the applicant considering the submissions of the applicant and reasons given in paragraphs no.3 and 4, as under:
"3. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation in the complaint is that the motor pump, which operates on solar power, and its wiring were stolen by an
unknown person. The stolen items were later found in the adjacent land. The informant suspects the applicant has committed the offence as he was allegedly seen running away from the field where the stolen motor and wire were found. Based on this suspicion, the applicant has been accused of committing the theft of the solar pump.
4. The learned Counsel further submits that the applicant is a respected person in the village with no antecedents. There is no reason for him to commit theft in the informant's field, and the allegations are purely based on suspicion."
4] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that thereafter the applicant has attended the concerned police station and cooperated with the investigation. However, the learned APP submits that the applicant has not produced the missing articles. In response to which the learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is not involved in the offence and his submission regarding stolen articles is recorded in the order dated 27.03.2025.
5] Considering that the applicant has attended the concerned police station and cooperated with the investigation, no further custodial interrogation would be necessary. In view of that, the interim protection granted by order dated 27.03.2025 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.
6] In the event, the applicant violates any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be cancelled.
7] 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.
8] The application stands disposed of.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE marathe