Digambar Vitthal Chobhe v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2026:BHC-AUG:22987
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2017 OF 2025 Dnyaneshwar Alias Mauli Bhausaheb Chobhe
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4679 OF 2025 Digambar Vitthal Chobhe
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another Ms. S. G. Sonawane, Advocate for applicant Mr. P. R. Nangare, Advocate for informant Mr. S. G. Joshi, APP for respondent-State
CORAM
: R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 12th JUNE, 2026 PER COURT :- 1.
Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 0858 of 2025 registered with Ahilyanagar police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 115, 118(1), 119(1), 351(2), 351(3), 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. 2.
On 01.10.2025, first informant lodged report in respect of incident allegedly occurred on 27.09.2025. It is the contention of the informant that on that day, at about 6:45 PM, present applicant assaulted him with stick on his head. He also claimed that he abused informant and took away cash as well as his gold chain.
3.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that admittedly, there are disputes between the parties over the agricultural lands. It is her contention that is unexplained delay in lodging of the report since the incident has occurred on 27.09.2025 and the report is lodged on 01.10.2025. She drew attention of the Court to the observations made by the Sessions Court indicating that on 29.09.2025, the informant was seen riding motor cycle with milk cans and hence, there is no substance in the contention that informant was admitted in hospital from 29.09.2025 and therefore, there was delay in lodging of the report. Applicant said to have no criminal history behind him. It is her contention that considering the previous disputes, possibility of false implication is not ruled out.
4.
Learned APP and learned counsel for informant opposed the application. It is contention of learned counsel for informant that he has placed on record document indicating the admission of the informant in the hospital on 29.09.2025 at about 05:18 PM and therefore, even if informant was found riding motorcycle earlier in the day that does not become a ground to grant bail to the applicant. Learned APP opposes application by citing seriousness of the crime. 5.
Prima facie, perusal of the record indicates that there is delay in lodging of the First Information Report though the informant claims
that he was admitted in a private hospital on 29.09.2025. Perusal of the discharge summary does not indicate any history of assault being given by the informant to the doctor. In the light of these facts, delay caused in lodging of the report assumes relevance. It becomes more serious in view of the fact that there are disputes between the parties. Liberty of the applicant was protected by the order of this Court dated 19.11.2025. There is nothing on record to show that applicant has misused his liberty. This Court finds no justification to reject the application. 6.
Application stands allowed in terms of interim relief. 7.
Pending application stands disposed of.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.) B. S. Joshi