Machindra Bhanudas Berad And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2025:BHC-AUG:13264
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 66 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 628 OF 2025
1. MACHINDRA BHANUDAS BERAD
2. DEEPMALA MACHINDRA BERAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. More Abhijit S.
APP for Respondent/State: Mr. B. B. Bhise ...
AND ...
67 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 639 OF 2025
1. ASHOK MAHADEV BERAD
2. BABAN DYANDEV BERAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Tarde Vivek V.
APP for Respondent/State: Mr. B. B. Bhise ...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
DATE : 05.05.2025 P.C. :
1] Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned APP for the respondent-State.
2] The applicants in ABA No.628/2025 have approached this Court apprehending arrest in connection with FIR No.54/2025, dated 08/02/2025, registered with
Ahilyanagar Camp City Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 351(3), and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3] The applicants in ABA No.639/2025 have also approached this Court apprehending arrest in connection with FIR No.57/2025, dated 09/02/2025, registered with Ahilyanagar Camp Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for offences punishable under Sections 74, 75, 115(2), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
4] This court by order dated 17.04.2025 granted interim protection to the applicants noticing submissions at paragraph no. 5, as under:
"5.
Considering the submissions made on behalf of both sides and on perusal of the allegations against the applicants in both matters, this Court is inclined to grant interim protection."
5] The learned counsel for the applicants submits that thereafter they have cooperated with the investigation. 6] The learned APP submits that the both the
applicants have given 183 statement consistent with the complaints.
7] Considering that there are cross-FIRs and both the parties being related to one another, this court is inclined to confirm the interim protection granted earlier to the applicants.
8] In view of the above, the interim protection granted by order dated 17.04.2025 stands confirmed, on the following terms:
i] The applicants shall attend the police station as and when required by the Investigating Officer. ii] The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner. They shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case.
iii] The applicants shall co-operate with the investigation and also in the proceedings before the trial Court.
9] In the event, the applicants violate any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be cancelled.
10] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present anticipatory bail applications and the trial Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.
11] The applications stand disposed of.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE marathe