Kunal Gopal Chaudhari v. The State Of Maharashtra

933-aba-967-2022.odt (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.967 OF 2022 KUNAL GOPAL CHAUDHARI

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Harshal Prakash Randhir APP for Respondent/State : Mr. K.S. Patil ...

CORAM : S.G. MEHARE, J.

DATED : 12th AUGUST, 2022 PER COURT:- 1.

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

2.

It has been alleged against the applicant that he assaulted the first informant with sickle like sharp weapon on his head and caused him injury.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that since the report was lodged by the applicant against the first informant, a false counter report has been lodged against him. He would submit that no weapon as alleged has been used by the applicant. Therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted to him.

4.

Learned APP has strongly opposed the application contending that there are direct allegations of using the sharp weapon like sickle and causing injury to the first informant. The informant has suffered grievous injury. The weapon is yet to be recovered. The

933-aba-967-2022.odt (2) offence is serious. Therefore, the applicant has no case for anticipatory bail.

5.

Perused the FIR. The direct allegations have been levelled against the applicant that he assaulted the first informant with sharp weapon like sickle. The investigation papers supports the contention of the learned APP that the injured has suffered grievous injury. The weapon is yet to be seized. Considering the gravity of the offence and the evidence collected by the Investigation Officer against the applicant, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail. Hence, the application stands dismissed. (S.G. MEHARE, J.) Mujaheed//