Balaji Gunwant Khedkar v. The State Of Maharashtra
2025:BHC-AUG:14978
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 969 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 991 OF 2025 BALAJI GUNWANT KHEDKAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. More P. P.
APP for Respondent/State: Mrs. Vaishali N. Patil Jadhav ...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
DATE : 13.06.2025 P.C. :
1] Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State.
2] The applicant is seeking bail as he was arrested on 20.01.2025 in connection with Crime No.755/2024, dated 01.11.2024, registered with MIDC Latur Police Station, Latur, District Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 109, 333, 352, 351(2), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3] The learned counsel for the applicant relies upon the order passed in the case of co-accused Rangnath Narhari Dure Vs. The Sate of Maharashtra and another, Bail Application No.608 of 2025, dated 24.04.2025. He submits
that the case of the applicant is identical to the case of the co-accused Rangnath (supra). The facts of the case of prosecution is noted in paragraph no.4 of the said order, as under:
"4. Heard. Perused the FIR dated 01.11.2024 at the instance of Umakant Sot. He has reported that on 27.10.2024 at around 8.30 p.m., his younger son Mauli left house. At around 9.30 p.m., Govind Dure and Om Khedkar came and assaulted him, his wife and other son by means of stick and shock absorbers and even said that they have finished their younger son. When informant and his family members went there, they found Mauli lying injured and people had gathered there. Informant claims that while shifting his younger son to hospital, he allegedly told that Rohini had given him a chit and had called him to meet and therefore, he alone went there and that, around 9.00 p.m., Kamlakar, Kumar, Manoj, Govind, Om and Gopal initially abused and gave him kicks and fist blows.
That time, Om,Gopal and Kamlakar beat him with sticks, whereas Govind and Manoj used shock absorbers to beat him. After reporting it, his son alleged fell unconscious. Thus, prima facie six persons are named in the FIR,but name of applicant does not figure therein." 4] The learned counsel submits that similarly as Rangnath Narhari Dure, the name of the applicant was not mentioned in the FIR, although, six persons names were mentioned. The names of the applicant and Rangnath Narhari Dure was taken in supplementary statement of the informant on 06.01.2025 and the statement of the alleged eye witnesses i.e. Khanderao and Dagdu were recorded almost after a gap of three months in which the name of the present applicant as well as Rangnath Narhari Dure was for the first time taken by these eye witnesses.
Considering this aspect of the matter, this court has granted bail to Rangnath Narhari Dure.
5] The learned APP has not been able to dispute
this aspect of the matter that the applicant's name was not mentioned the FIR and that his name was later on taken by the informant and the eye witnesses i.e. Khanderao and Dagdu.
6] This court considering the supplementary statement of informant recorded on 06.01.2025 and the eye witnesses evidence recorded after three months has granted bail to the co-accused, whose role is identical to that of the present applicant.
7] Considering that the role of the co-accused is identical to that of the present applicant and both the names were subsequently added, this court would grant bail to the present applicant on the ground of parity. 8] In view of the above, the application is allowed in the following terms :
a] The applicant shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.755/2024, dated 01.11.2024, registered with MIDC Latur Police Station, Latur, District Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 109, 333, 352, 351(2), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like
amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. b] The applicant shall not enter the vicinity where informant, his family members and near and dear ones reside, till conclusion of the trial.
c] The applicant, upon being released on bail, shall not contact the informant, in any manner whatsoever, during the pendency of the trial. d] The applicant shall co-operate with the trial Court and he shall attend each and every date, unless exempted by the trial Court.
e] The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution and he shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case.
f] The applicant, upon being released on bail, shall place on record of the trial Court the details of his Contact Number and residential address with updates in case of any change.
9] Needless to say, in case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions, the bail granted to the applicant shall be liable to be cancelled.
10] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present bail application. The concerned Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.
11] The application stands disposed of.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE marathe