Karan Santosh Vedpathak And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2025:BHC-AUG:23292 (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 33 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 458 OF 2025 KARAN SANTOSH VEDPATHAK AND ANOTHER ....Appellants

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER .....Respondents Mr. A. G. Jadhav, Advocate for the appellants Mrs. Karishma Sarin, Advocate for the respondent NO. 2 Mr. S. B. Jadhav, APP for the respondents/State CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J.

DATE : 26th AUGUST, 2025 P. C.

1.

Heard the learned advocate for the parties.

2.

In the present case the appellants have approached this court seeking their regular bail in connection with Crime No. 167/2025 registered with Pachod, Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad (Rural) for the offences punishable under sections 118(2), 118(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC and ST

(2) (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

3.

The FIR came to be lodged on 30-04-2025. It is alleged in the FIR that in the night hours at 11.00 pm the informant was beaten by the present appellants alongwith one other. On the basis of FIR the appellants came to be arrested on 18-05-2025 and since then they are in jail. The allegations against the accused Karan is that he assaulted on the head and left leg of the informant with the iron pipe. Against Arjun the allegations is that he has assaulted on the right leg of the informant. The informant received total eight injuries and his left leg got fractured. The informant was admitted from 29-042025 till 10-05-2025. 4.

Now the bail is sought on the ground that the appellants are falsely implicated.

5.

Investigation is over. Charge-sheet is filed and no custody is required.

(3) 6.

The learned APP opposed the appeal stating that clearly the appellants are seen in the offence. There is CCTV footage obtained during the course of the investigation where all three accused persons are clearly seen. There is terror like situation created by the accused. Hence, the learned APP opposed the bail.

7.

The learned advocate for respondent No. 2 (appointed) also vehemently opposed the bail application. She submits that there is clear evidence against present appellants. There is recovery at the instance of the accused. There are criminal antecedents and because of terror situation, no one came forward to give statement. She thus, opposed the bail appeal.

8.

It is the case of causing grievous hurt by the present appellants. Since last three months they are in jail. Now the investigation is over. A care can be taken by imposing necessary

(4) conditions. Hence, the following order:

ORDER

a] The Cri. Appeal stands allowed.

b] The appellants be released in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No. 167/2025 registered with Pachod, Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad (Rural) for the offences punishable under sections 118(2), 118(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, on furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- [Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only] each with one solvent surety/security in the like amount, on the following conditions:

i] The appellants shall attend the police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

ii] The appellants shall not try to

(5) contact or pressurize the witnesses or the informant.

iii] The appellants shall not reside in the Pachod village, Tq. Pithan till the trial is over except for attending the the police station and court.

c] The learned advocate for the respondent No.2 is appointed through the Legal Aid. She is entitled to receive an amount of Rs.5000/- to be paid by the High Court Legal Aid Services Sub-Committee.

[KISHORE C. SANT, J.] VishalK/33criapl458.25