Anil Laxman Chavan And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra
2025:BHC-AUG:22800 {1} 1139-25-ABA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1139 OF 2025
1. Anil Laxman Chavan
2. Jay Anil Chavan
3. Rajiv Baburao Chavan .... Applicants
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Through Pachod Police Station, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Chh. Sambhajinagar.
..... Respondent ......
Mr. M.L. Wanjgade, Advocate for Applicants Mr. D.S. Jape, APP for Respondent - State ......
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
RESERVED ON : 19 AUGUST, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 21 AUGUST, 2025 ORDER :
1.
Applicants seek anticipatory bail in connection with crime bearing No.0112 of 2025 registered with Pachod Police Station, District Chh. Sambhajinagar, for the offence punishable under Sections 118(2), 118(1), 189(2), 189(3), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 352, 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
2.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated. That, the present complaint is a
{2} 1139-25-ABA counterblast to the complaint lodged by the applicant under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Moreover, the present FIR is delayed. That, offence under Section 326 of the IPC is not attracted, as the injuries sustained are simple in nature. That, nothing is to be recovered or discovered from the applicants. As the applicants are ready to cooperate with the investigation, relief of pre-arrest bail is sought. 3.
Learned APP opposed the application on the ground that weapons such as iron bars and an axe were used in the incident. That, medical papers are placed on record. That, the applicants are specifically named in the FIR. That, their individual roles have been clearly attributed, and therefore, the application for bail is opposed. 4.
Heard. Perused the FIR dated 15.03.2025, lodged at the instance of Ravindra Thombre, wherein it is reported that on 14.03.2025, when he questioned the present applicant for using abusive language in front of his house, it is alleged that the applicant Anil returned shortly thereafter along with his son Jay, and others, namely Raju, Ashok, Deepak, Kaial, and Sunil. It is alleged that the applicant Anil was armed with an axe, whereas his son Jay, was armed with an iron rod and assaulted the informant on his arms, while Raju allegedly gave blows to the informant's back and legs. Thereafter, it is alleged that the remaining
{3} 1139-25-ABA accused assaulted the informant with kicks and fist blows. It is further alleged that the present applicant used the handle of the axe during in assaulting the informant. After visiting the Rural Hospital, the informant lodged the report.
5.
Learned counsel for the applicant has placed on record a copy of the FIR bearing Crime No. 0113 of 2025, dated 15.03.2025, registered against Ganesh Thombre, Ravindra Thombre, Eknath Thombre, Raghunath Kisan Thombre, Krushna Thombre, and Bhausaheb Thombre, under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. FIR shows that initially the present applicant assaulted the informant by means of an axe, whereas his son hit him with an iron rod, and another person, namely Rajiv, used a stick. Others are alleged to have given kicks. It is further stated that when the informant's cousin came to intervene, he was struck with the handle of the axe. Thus, there are allegations of assault on Ravindra and his cousin by means of an axe. Medical papers have been placed on record. The referral card indicates a history of assault, noting a head injury, and advises a CT brain scan. The medical report shows a subgaleal hemorrhage of max. thickness of 6.6 mm in the left frontal region. 6.
Considering the above nature of allegations and role attributed to the present applicants in commission of offence, this Court is not
{4} 1139-25-ABA inclined to grant the relief as prayed for. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
Anticipatory bail application is rejected.
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, JUDGE S P Rane