Sudam Raghu Dude v. Dnyaneshwar Valmik Khurne And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1121 OF 2020 Valmik s/o Suka Khurne ... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ..........

Mr. S.B. Solanke, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. S. Y. Mahajan, APP for respondent - State. ..........

WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2156 OF 2020 IN ABA/1121/2020 Sudam Raghu Dude ... Applicant

Versus

Walmik Suka Khurne and another ... Respondents ..........

Mrs. S. T. Kazi, Advocate for applicant - original informant. Mr. S.B. Solanke, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. S. Y. Mahajan, APP for respondent No.2 - State. ..........

WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1123 OF 2020 Rushikesh s/o Bapu Khurne ... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ..........

Mr. S.B. Solanke, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. S. Y. Mahajan, APP for respondent - State. ..........

WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2157 OF 2020 IN ABA/1123/2020 Sudam Raghu Dude ... Applicant

Versus

Rushikesh Bapu Khurne and another ... Respondents (1)

..........

Mrs. S. T. Kazi, Advocate for applicant - original informant. Mr. S.B. Solanke, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. S. Y. Mahajan, APP for respondent No.2 - State. ..........

WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1124 OF 2020 1.

Dnyaneshwar Valmik Khurne 2.

Sopan Valmik Khurne 3.

Anna Sukdev Khurne 4.

Prabhakar Aanna Khurne ... Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ..........

Mr. S.B. Solanke, Advocate for applicants.

Mr. S. Y. Mahajan, APP for respondent - State. ..........

WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2158 OF 2020 IN ABA/1124/2020 Sudam Raghu Dude ... Applicant

Versus

Dnyaneshwar Walmik Khurne and others ... Respondents ..........

Mrs. S. T. Kazi, Advocate for applicant - original informant. Mr. S.B. Solanke, Advocate for respondent No.1 to 3. Mr. S. Y. Mahajan, APP for respondent No.2 - State. ..........

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.

DATE : 22-12-2020 ORDER :

.

Motion has been moved by the learned Advocate for original informant for speaking to the minutes of order dated 17-12-2020 and submits (2)

that inadvertently one of the conditions i.e. to refrain accused Nos.1 and 2 - Rushikesh Bapu Khurne and Valmik Suka Khurne from entering the village, is remained to be mentioned in the order dated 17-12-2020. The same is required to be added.

2.

In view of the aforesaid submission, following condition be added in order dated 17-12-2020 as condition No.VII.

"VII) Accused Nos.1 and 2 i.e. Rushikesh and Valmik shall not enter the village till the conclusion of the trial. They should inform the Investigating Officer where they proposed to live and give the complete address as well as their mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer as well as to the Court." 3.

Corrections be made accordingly.

4.

Motion stands disposed of.

[SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.] scm (3)