Sachin Baban Ladkat v. The State Of Maharashtra
Digitally signed by DINESH SADANAND SHERLA Date:
2025.02.01 15:11:19 +0530 DINESH SADANAND SHERLA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 104 OF 2025 Sachin B. Ladkat ...Applicant V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
...Respondent.
..............
Mr. Nitin G. Patil a/w. Mr. Shantanu Kolhe for the Applicant. Mr. T.G. Khan, APP for the Respondent/State.
PSI Shaikh Salim Gafur, Yavat Police Station, Pune present. ..............
CORAM
:
N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE :
15.01.2025.
P.C. :
1.
This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2.
The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.1148 of 2024 registered at Yavat Police Station, Dist. Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 110, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). 3.
There was dispute between the complainant and the present applicant on account of right of way. It is alleged in that respect the order was passed by the Tahsildar in favour of the complainant and thus the applicant was annoyed with the complainant. It is alleged that on the date of incident which took place on 22.11.2024, while complainant and his wife were going to the market on motorcycle, the present applicant came on Tractor from 1/3
opposite direction and gave dash to their motorcycle and attempted to kill them.
4.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent / State. 5.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that taking benefit of civil dispute, the complainant has lodged false complaint against the applicant as neither the complainant nor his wife sustained any injury in the alleged incident. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation. 6.
On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/ State submits that the applicant is involved in the serious nature of offence of attempt to murder. It is submitted that the applicant is involved in two more crimes. It is therefore, submitted that the application be rejected.
7.
I have perused the papers of investigation. According to the complainant in the alleged incident, his motorcycle was damaged and the indicators of motorcycle were broken. I have perused the photographs of the motorcycle. The indicators of motorcycle are intact. Apart from it, neither the complainant nor his wife were sent for medical examination after the alleged incident. The fact that they did not sustain injury prima - facie, creates doubt about their version. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail on certain conditions. In the result the following order is passed. 2/3
ORDER
A) The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed. B) In the event of arrest of the applicant in C.R. No.1148 of 2024 registered at Yavat Police Station, Dist. Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 110, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 324(4) of the BNS, he be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety or two sureties in the like amount.
C] The applicant shall not enter into the limits of Ladkatwadi, till conclusion of trial.
D] The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer and shall cooperate in the investigation.
E] The applicant after filing of charge-sheet shall attend the concerned police station once in a month, i.e., on 1st Saturday between 11.00 am to 2.00 pm, till conclusion of the trial.
[N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3