Kiran Sahebrao Bhujbal v. The State Of Maharashtra

22-APPLN-271-24.DOC Sayali Upasani

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 271 OF 2024 Kiran Sahebrao Bhujbal ...Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr.Ganesh Bhujbal, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. S. S. Chaudhari, APP for State-Respondent. CORAM:- ANIL S. KILOR, J.

DATED:- 2nd SEPTEMBER, 2024 PC :- 1) This is an application for relaxation of condition not enter in the village Shirsatwadi, Tal. Indapur, Dist. Pune, the learned trial Court while rejecting the application for relaxation of such condition has observed thus:- "6. It reveals to me that, on the basis of report lodged by the first informant Sonali Bhausaheb Bhujbal, applicant/accused along with other co-accused have been charged for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 143, 147, 149, 327, 354, 324, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 1356 of Maharashtra Police Act. Record shows that, there is a civil dispute appears to be going on in between both the parties and their relations with each other are very strained. In such situation, considering the facts advanced 1/2

22-APPLN-271-24.DOC before me on behalf of both side, coupled with the direct involvement of applicant/accused, in my opinion, if the present application is allowed by giving relaxation of condition, then possibility of pressurizing the witnesses as well as repetition of crime cannot be ruled out.

7. Admittedly, accused No. 1 is residing in the village and he is already released on anticipatory bail as per the order passed by this Court on 19/04/2023. Accused No. 1 as well as accused Nos. 4, 5, 6 are released on bail as per the order passed by the Court on 19/04/2023 and 20/12/2023 respectively and they can easily look after the agriculture work of their field. In such situation, the condition which is imposed by this court while allowing the bail application in the light of directions given by Hon'ble Supreme Court, it appears to be proper and there is no necessity to make any relaxation in the said condition. Accordingly, I not inclined to allow the present application and proceed to pass following order."

2) Considering the above referred reasons recorded by the trial Court, I do not find any illegality committed by the trial Court is not relaxing the condition. In that view of the matter, the application is rejected and disposed of.

[ANIL S. KILOR, J.] 2/2