Akshay Santosh Jadhav v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2024:BHC-AUG:13696 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 8 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 720 OF 2024 Akshay Santosh Jadhav

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra and another ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Bharat S. Doifode APP for Respondents: Mr. S.M. Ganachari .....

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATED : 8th JULY, 2024.

PER COURT :- 1.

The applicant apprehends arrest in connection with crime No. 73 of 2024 registered with Sillod Police Station, district Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offence punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 504 of the Indian Penal Code. 2.

It is the prosecution's case that on 26.02.2024, at about 8.30 a.m. the incident of assault took place between two rival groups on account of previous dispute. The members of both the groups assaulted each other by means of stone and by hands. It is alleged that in the said incident, the applicant had hit a stone on the head of Abhishek Suradkar and also inflicted a blow of knife on his abdomen. It is alleged that that applicants inflicted blow of knife on Keshav Suradkar. The offences are registered by both the groups against

-2each other.

3.

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that except the applicant, all co-accused have been released on bail. Learned counsel further submitted that the complainant has filed application before the trial court stating that the matter is settled between the parties and he has no objection to grant bail to the applicant. Learned counsel further submitted that the injuries sustained to both the injured persons are simple in nature. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. Hence he requested to allow the application.

4.

It is the contention of the learned APP that the applicant was a part of group which assaulted the first informant and his colleagues. The applicant assaulted injured witnesses with sharp weapon and stone with intention to kill them. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is required to recover the knife used in the crime. Hence he requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused the F.I.R. and the police papers produced on record. The first informant had filed application before the trial court stating that the matter is settled between the first informant and the accused in the present crime.

-3Hence, he has no objection if the bail is granted to the applicant. The allegations against the applicant are that he has assaulted two injured witnesses with stone and knife. The police has recovered the knife and stone from the spot of incident. The nature of injuries caused to the injured witnesses are simple in nature. Considering these facts, the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required. Hence I pass the following order :-

O R D E R

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with crime No. 73 of 2024 registered with Sillod Police Station, district Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for the offence punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 504 of the Indian Penal Code, the applicant be released on executing personal bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one surety of the like amount, on the following conditions :- (a) the applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required by the Investigating Officer. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) rlj/