Tanaji Narayan Chavan v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 656 OF 2025 Tajaji Narayan Chavan .... Appellant

Versus

State of Maharashtra and Anr.

.... Respondent ----- Ms. Tanvi Tapkire, Advocate for the Appellant. Ms. Shilpa Gajare, A.P.P., for the Respondent - State. Mr. Ajinkya M. Udane a/w Mr. Vinayak Pandit a/w Mr. Satyam Mansuri, Advocate for Respondent No.2.

----- CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date:

2025.08.07 10:05:18 +0530 SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM DATE : 5th AUGUST, 2025.

P.C. :

1.

The bail application of the Appellant is rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli, hence this appeal is preferred by the Appellant before this Court. 2.

The Appellant apprehends arrest in Crime No. 281 of 2025 registered with Jath Police Station, District - Sangli, for the offence punishable under Sections 118(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3) 190 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 3(1) (r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) and 6 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short, "SC ST Act"). 3.

It is prosecution's case that on 26th April, 2025 at about Shantanu S. Dhudum 1/4

7:00 p.m., when the first informant was going with his family members to his house. The Appellant and co-accused Siddhanath assaulted the first informant with iron rod, cable wire, and abused on his caste.

4.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Appellant that the allegations of abuse on caste are in chorus. The Anticipatory Bail Application of the co-accused Siddhanath has been allowed by the Sessions Court, Sangli. The Investigation is almost complete. Hence, requested to allow the appeal.

5.

It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that the Appellant and the co-accused assaulted the first informant with cable wire, iron rod, and fist and blows. The Appellant and co-accused Siddhanath abused the first informant on his caste. The incident occurred in public view. Considering allegations against the Appellant, his custodial interrogation is required and requested to dismiss the appeal. 6.

I have heard all learned counsel, perused F.I.R. and documents produced on record.

7.

The allegations against the Appellant are that he and coaccused abused the first informant on his caste. The said allegation Shantanu S. Dhudum 2/4

are in chorus. Moreover, the co-accused Siddhanath has been released on anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Court, Sangli. The said bail order has not been challenged. Considering these facts, custodial interrogation of the Appellant is not required, and I pass following order:

ORDER

i. In the event of arrest, the Appellant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 281 of 2025 registered with Jath Police Station, District: Sangli, on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

ii. The Appellant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

iii. The Appellant shall not attempt to influence or contact the witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

. The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 8.

It is made clear that the above observations are made only for the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by Shantanu S. Dhudum 3/4

the observations made in this order.

9.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) Shantanu S. Dhudum 4/4