Arjun Digambar Chaudhari v. State Of Maharashtra Through Pso Ps Washim Rural
2025:BHC-NAG:14055 1 / 3 15-aba 872-25
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION(ABA) NO. 872 OF 2025 Arjun Digambar Chaudhary Vs. State of Maharashtra ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. M.N.Ali, counsel for the applicant.
Mr. Ashish Kadukar, APP for the State.
CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 11/12/2025 1.
The applicant has apprehension of arrest in Crime No.289/2025 registered with Police Station Washim, District Washim for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 296, 3(5), 351(3) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2.
The allegations made against this applicant are that on 24.09.2025 the dispute arose between the family of the first informant and the complainant regarding the use of Dhura of the agricultural land. Arjun Digambar Chaudhary confronted Mrs. Sumanbai Chaudhary, abused her in filthy language, threatened to kill her and her family and physically assaulted her. When her husband intervened,
2 / 3 15-aba 872-25 Arjun Chaudhary along with Gopal Digambar Chaudhary and Digambar Bhagwan Chaudhary attacked him; Gopal struck his head with an iron rod, causing serious bleeding injury and unconsciousness and they further kicked him on the private parts. Her son Vitthal and Mahadev were also beaten during the incident.
3. The learned Counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant has not assaulted with an iron rod. The role attributed to this applicant is that he caught hold the injured and assault was by Gopal. The injured is discharged from the hospital. Gopal is arrested and is in custody. 4.
The learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is attending the police station as per condition imposed upon him on 19/11/2025.
5.
The learned APP has pointed out that the eye witness has mentioned the active role of this applicant. He was holding hands of the injured and assault by the other accused. The accused is in jail and the learned APP has stated that they are cousins and dispute is going on between both the family members. If he is protected, there is every possibility of committing the similar offence. Hence requested to impose stringent condition as not to enter into the village, where the complainant is staying. Considering
3 / 3 15-aba 872-25 the role played by the applicant and as the applicant is attending the police station regularly, and the charge-sheet is filed. As the investigation is completed, the interim protection granted on 19.11.2025 needs to be confirmed on the same terms and conditions except condition No.iv. i] The application is allowed.
ii] The order dated 19/11/2025 granting ad-interim anticipatory bail is confirmed.
iii] The applicant shall not enter into the village where the complainant is staying till the conclusion of the trial.
iv] The application stands disposed of.
JUDGE