Bhikanrao Bhatu Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 963 OF 2021 Bhikanrao Bhatu Patil, Age 42 years, Occu: Agriculturist, R/o At Post Hispur, Tq. Sindkheda, District Dhule.

...

Applicant

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra, Through Sindkheda Police Station, District Dhule.

...

Respondent Mr. V. B. Patil, Advocate for the applicant Mrs. V. S. Chaudhari, APP for the State

CORAM

: V. G. BISHT, J.

DATE : 7th September, 2021 ORDER:

1.

This is an application under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 preferred by the applicant seeking grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 106/2021 registered with Sindkheda Police Station, District Dhule for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 395, 354, 452, 427, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2.

It is the case of prosecution that on 11.07.2021, the informant, her husband and son were sleeping in her house. At about 6.30 a.m. the applicant alongwith his wife Dipmala Bhikanrao, Vijay Waman Bhamre, Sachin Patil and other 15 to 20 unknown persons, keeping in mind the grudge of the complaint lodged by the son of informant.

assembled, and entered into her house and started beating her. It is further alleged that applicant tried to throttle her, broken Mangalsutra and bangles. It is further alleged that the applicant also assaulted her husband by means of iron road. All the accused then also removed an amount of Rs.25,000/- from the house. Accordingly, the first information report came to be lodged,.

3.

Heard Mr. V. B. Patil, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. S.P. Brahme, learned counsel assists to P.P. and also Mrs V. S. Chaudhari, learned A.P.P.

4.

All the parties have fairly submitted that the parties to the dispute have amicably settled their dispute. When this was confronted to learned A.P.P., the learned A.P.P. also produced a report of the concerned Investigating Officer intimating her that an application had been moved by the informant in the police station informing that she has compromised the matter with the applicant/accused. Learned A.PP. has also annexed statement of the informant to the said letter wherein, the informant addressed a letter to the investigating officer contending therein that she has no complaint against the applicant and others and further that she has no complaint against recovery of Rs.25,000/-. 5.

In the light of above facts, in my considered opinion, there is no necessity of custodial interrogation.

6.

Hence, following order.

O R D E R

i.

In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with Crime No. 106/2021 registered with Sindkheda Police Station, District Dhule for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 395, 354, 452, 427, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the applicant is directed to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.20,000/- [Rs. Twenty thousand only], with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

ii. The applicant shall attend concerned police station as and when called and shall cooperate with the police in the investigation. 7.

Application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (V. G. BISHT, J.) JPC