Ravi Rajendra Sonawane And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 25 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.727 OF 2022

1. RAVI RAJENDRA SONAWANE,

2. AKSHAY SANJAY GHAYTADAK

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Jadhav Satej S. APP for Respondent-State : Mr. S. B. Narwade. ...

CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.

DATE :

27.06.2022 PER COURT :- 1.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned APP for the State.

2.

Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the name of applicant Ravi is barely mentioned in the FIR. No specific allegations have been levelled against him. No role he has attributed to him. The name of applicant Akshay is not mentioned in the FIR. The applicants have no concern with the alleged incident. It was a matrimonial dispute between husband and wife. A counter-report is also registered. Since no role has been played by the applicants; hence, the custodial interrogation of the applicants is not necessary. They may be released on bail.

3.

Per contra, learned APP would submit that the victim in her statement alleged that all the persons on the spot entered the home and have taken away the ornaments and money. It has been alleged in her statement that applicant Ravi pelted stones. It has also alleged that all the accused damaged the motorcycle and one four-wheeled vehicle. The offence is serious. Two crimes are to the discredit of the applicant Ravi. Therefore, they are not entitled to anticipatory bail. 4.

Perusal of the FIR reveals that the name of applicant Ravi is there, but no overt acts have been alleged against him. In the statement of the injured / victim, his role has been added that he pelted stone. It was a dispute arising from the matrimonial dispute between the main applicant and the injured. The incident happened as alleged when the husband of the injured asked the injured to join the company of her husband/co-accused. A counter-report has also been lodged from her husband's side.

5.

The court has gone through the case papers. It appears that it was a dispute arising out of the matrimonial dispute. Unfortunately, when the husband asked his wife/ the injured to join his company, the quarrel occurred. No doubt the allegations are serious, but the fact remains that the role

played by the applicants is not specific. Both the applicants have not played an active role in the incident. There are no grounds to have their custodial interrogation. Therefore, application deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following order :

O R D E R

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) In the event of arrest, applicant No.1 Ravi Rajendra Sonawane and 2. Akshay Sanjay Ghaytadak, shall be released on bail in Crime No. 55 of 2022, registered with Police Station Sangamner, District Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 326, 324, 120-B, 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 337, 427, 504, 506 of the IPC, on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety in the like amount each, on the conditions that they shall attend the Police Station on every Wednesday and Saturday between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. till 16.07.2022. They shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) Parties to act upon the authenticated copy of this order.

(S. G. MEHARE, J.) ...

vmk/-