Ganesh Pandit Chavan v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 990 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1056 OF 2025 Ganesh Pandit Chavan
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another ...
Advocate for Applicant : Ms. Lomte Ashwini Annasaheb APP for Respondents-State: Mr. P. P. Dawalkar ...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
Dated : June 19, 2025.
PER COURT :- 1.
Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State.
2.
The applicant seeks bail in connection with FIR No. 0030/2025, dated 17/01/2025, registered with Police Station Ambajogai City, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 109 and 351(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Sections 3, 5, 25, and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
3.
The case of the prosecution is that there was a love affair between the informant and the applicant/accused. Subsequently, the informant was not inclined to continue the relationship due to alleged harassment by the applicant/accused, who insisted on continuing the same. It is alleged that the applicant/accused threatened the informant and, on 17/01/2025, asked the 1 of
informant's mother to open the door. Out of fear, the informant, along with her mother and brother, locked themselves in a bedroom. At that time, the informant's brother, Siddheshwar Kadam, entered the hall and tried to close the window, whereupon the applicant/accused fired a shot with a pistol, which shattered the window glass and hit the sofa. 4.
The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that no one was injured in the incident and the weapon has been recovered. It is further submitted that another offence has been registered by the same victim against the applicant under Section 354 of the IPC. The investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has been filed. The learned Counsel further submits that the applicant undertakes not to reside in Latur District, not to commit any similar offence, and not to threaten the informant or her family members.
5.
The learned APP has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the applicant may threaten the informant and her family members if released on bail.
6.
Considering that no one was injured in the incident, that the investigation is complete, and that the applicant has been in custody for six months, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant deserves to be released on bail, subject to appropriate conditions. 2 of
7.
In view of the above, the application is allowed in the following terms: - a] The applicant shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No. 0030/2025, dated 17/01/2025, registered with Police Station Ambajogai City, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 109 and 351(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and under Sections 3, 5, 25, and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, on executing a PR bond of ₹25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
b] Upon release on bail, the applicant shall not, in any manner whatsoever, contact the informant during the pendency of the trial.
c] The applicant shall co-operate with the trial Court and shall attend each and every hearing, unless exempted by the trial Court.
d] The applicant shall not enter Latur District. He shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or attempt to influence the informant, witnesses, or any other persons concerned with the case.
e] Upon release on bail, the applicant shall furnish his current contact number and residential address to the trial Court and shall promptly update the same in case of any change.
8.
Needless to state, in case of violation of any of the aforesaid 3 of
conditions, the bail granted to the applicant shall be liable to be cancelled. It is further clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the adjudication of the present bail application. The trial Court shall proceed with the matter uninfluenced by any observations herein. 9.
The application stands disposed of accordingly. ( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ) vj gawade/-.
4 of