Raunak Umesh @ Guddu Paliwal v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Pso Tahsil Ps Tahsil Nanga Putla Chowk Gandhibag Nagpur

2025:BHC-NAG:2512

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1168 OF 2024 (Raunak Umesh @ Guddu Paliwal Vs. State of Maharashtra) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. P.S. Tiwari, Advocate for the applicant.

Ms T.H. Udeshi, A.P.P. for the State.

Mr. R.R. Deo, Advocate for Assist to Prosecution. CORAM:- URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.

DATED :- MARCH 11, 2025.

Heard.

2.

By preferring this application, the applicant seeking bail as he came to be arrested on 12/10/2023 in connection with Crime No.844/2023 registered with Police Station Tahsil, Nagpur, District Nagpur for the offence punishable under Sections 436 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was employee of the informant who is running a paint shop. As per the allegation, the present applicant has put the said shop on fire and caused the damage to the informant to the extent of Rs.45,00,000/-. On the basis of the said report, police have registered the crime against the present applicant. He submitted that the applicant is behind bar from one and half year. Now, the investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed. He further submitted that as per the allegation of the

informant this act is done by the present applicant as he is removed from the service but in fact, present applicant is not at all involved in the said act but only because there is some dispute between the employer and employee this false allegations are levelled against him. Considering now the investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed, his further incarceration is not required. In view of that, he be released on bail.

4.

Learned APP and learned Counsel for the complainant strongly opposed the application on the ground that there is threat to the life of the informant. Moreover, considering the nature of the offence that merely because he was removed from the work he has set the entire building on fire and the damage is caused to the extent of Rs.45,00,000/-. If the applicant is released on bail, there is every apprehension of endanger to the life of the informant. Considering all these aspects, the application deserves to be rejected.

5.

I have heard learned Counsel for both the sides and on perusal of the investigation papers, the involvement of the present applicant not only reveals from the statement of the informant, but also from the CCTV footage panchnama. Now, admittedly the investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed. Considering the nature of the offence, at the same time considering the apprehension raised by the learned Counsel for the applicant some conditions require to be imposed on the

present applicant. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) The applicant - Raunak Umesh @ Guddu Paliwal in connection with Crime No.844/2023 registered with Police Station Tahsil, Nagpur, District Nagpur for the offence punishable under Sections 436 of the Indian Penal Code, be released on bail on executing a P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety, in the like amount.

(iii) The applicant shall not enter into the vicinity of Nagpur city except attending the proceeding before the Sessions Court.

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement and threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the present case either personally or by way of electronic media.

(v) The applicant shall attend the proceedings before the Sessions Court without seeking any exemption unless there are exceptional circumstances.

(vi) The applicant shall furnish his detailed address along with address proof wherein he is intending to reside after he is released on bail.

(vii) The applicant shall furnish the names of his two relatives and their addresses with address proof before the investigating agency. (viii) The applicant shall not indulge himself in similar type of the activities.

6.

The contravention of any of the condition imposed by this Court would lead to the cancellation of bail.

7.

The application is disposed of.

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) *Divya