Vikas Raghu Pawar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2026:BHC-AUG:3171 {1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2161 OF 2025 Vikas Raghu Pawar ....Applicant
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another .....Respondent .....
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Ghanekar Nilesh S. APP for Respondents: Mr. R.K. Ingole.
Assisting prosecution counsel : Mrs. Suvarna Zavare. CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.
DATE : 19th JANUARY, 2026.
P.C. :- 1.
The applicant has approached this court seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 857 of 2025, registered with Parner Police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar, for the offence punishable under Sections 189-2, 191-2, 190, 324-4, 119-1, 115-2, 351-2, 308-2 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
2.
The prosecution case is that the informant was working as Security Guard in Abhinav Enterprizes and was working in the Windmill situated at Darodi, Taluka Parner. It is alleged that on 18.11.2025 at 5.30 p.m. when informant was in his office at said Windmill at Darodi, at that time, present applicant came in the office and assaulted the informant with fists and kicks and also threatened the complainant with a sickle in his hand. It is further alleged that thereafter 7-8 unknown persons came into the office of informant and damaged the computer and its operating system and mobile and other furniture of the informant. It is further alleged that the present applicant gave threats to the
{2} informant that if the informant came to work then he will kill him. It is also alleged that the present applicant has threatened the informant by saying " Tell the owner of the windmill Chandu Thube that if he want to carry on the working of the said windmill, he will have to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- as a ransom and thereafter the applicant took out Rs. 22,000/- from the pocket of the informant. It is alleged that thereafter the site incharge Kiran D. Pawar came and saved the informant. On these allegations, the FIR came to be registered against present applicant and other unknown persons.
3.
Mr. Ghanekar, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is falsely implicated in the present crime the allegations are fake and bogus. The applicant was having an ambition to contest the elections and therefore, the complainant who is also employee of political party has deliberately roped the present applicant with an intention to close any chances of applicant getting ticket from the popular political parties. The applicant is falsely roped in with an intention to wreak vengeance and to finish the political career of the present applicant. The learned counsel for applicant further submits that the applicant is ready to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court. The applicant has deep roots in the society and is not a flight risk. The other criminal antecedents against the applicant are stale and non-cognizable offences registered against him. Same would not, by itself, preclude the present applicant from seeking anticipatory bail. The applicant may, therefore, be released on anticipatory bail. 4.
As against this, the learned APP vehemently opposes the application on the ground that the applicant is having criminal antecedents. Three earlier offences are there, one at Parner bearing Crime No., 170 of 2015 is already registered against him for the offence under Section 307 of IPC i.e. attempt to commit murder. The other crime
{3} bearing FIR No., 773 of 2016 is also registered for committing rioting and unlawful assembly by the applicant. Last offence is registered bearing Crime No., 366 of 2025 at Police Station Supa for the offence punishable under Sections 351, 352 and 324 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. Thus, taking into consideration the aforesaid past criminal record of the applicant, there is every likelihood that the applicant, if released, may threaten the prosecution witnesses and intimate the witnesses, thereby causing prejudice to the prosecution case.
5.
The learned counsel assisting the prosecution adopts the arguments of the APP and submits that the applicant being a historysheeter may not be entitled for release on anticipatory bail. 6.
I have gone through the investigation papers made available by the learned APP. Perusal of the investigation papers shows that the Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of the complainant Rajendra Ghule and has also conducted the spot panchanama, which shows the remains of damage allegedly caused by the applicant to the said office, where the complainant was working as a Security Guard. The statement of Kiran Pawar also corroborates the allegations against the applicant.
However, taking into consideration the injuries sustained by the complainant which are of simple nature as seen in the Injury Certificate issued by the Rural Hospital, Parner, in my view, the custodial interrogation of the applicant may not be necessary taking into consideration the submission made that the applicant may be roped in false allegations with an intention to wreak political vengeance out of political enmity. Therefore, false implication of the applicant cannot be ruled out. However, the observations made herein are made only for the purpose of deciding the present application and shall not influence the trial court. The apprehension of the learned APP and assisting counsel can be taken care of by imposing stringent conditions.
{4} inclined to exercise discretionary powers under Section 482 of the BNSS in favour of the applicant. Hence, the following order :-
O R D E R
[I] In the event of arrest of the applicants, in connection with Crime No. 857 of 2025, registered with Parner Police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar, for the offence punishable under Sections 189-2, 191-2, 190, 324-4, 119-1, 115-2, 351-2, 3082 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, the applicant Vikas Raghu Pawar be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each, with one or more sureties in the like amount, on the following conditions :- [i] The applicant shall attend the concerned police station and report to the Investigating Officer on 23rd, 24th, 30th, 31st January, 2026 and thereafter as and when called by the Investigating Officer till filing of charge sheet. [ii] The applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Parner Police Station, except for attending the police station, as directed above till the framing of charge by the trial court. [ii] The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
[iii] The applicant shall submit his Aadhar and Pan card to the Investigating Officer alongwith mobile numbers and addresses of two of his near relatives and his present address.
[iv] The application stands disposed of. The application for permission to assist the prosecution bearing No. 4676 of 2025 also stands disposed of.
[MEHROZ K. PATHAN] JUDGE.
grt/-