Rajendra Gangaram Yadav v. The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso, Kondhali Ps, Tah. Katol And Dist. Nagpur
2025:BHC-NAG:8082 1 916.ABA.563-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 563 OF 2025 ( Rajendra Gangaram Yadav Vs.
State of Maharashtra, Thr. PSO Kondhali Police Station, Tah. Katol, District Nagpur. ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. A.G. Hunge, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. A.A. Madiwale, APP for the Non-applicant/State. CORAM: URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED : 14th AUGUST, 2025 1.
Apprehending the arrest at the hands of Police in connection with Crime No. 69/2025 registered with Police Station Kondhali, District Nagpur, for the offenses punishable under Sections 123, 318(4), 338, 340(2), 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 65(a), 65(b), 65(c), 65(d), 65(e), 65(f), 67(1)(A), 67(C), 72, 83, 86, 90 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, the Applicant approached to this Court for grant of per arrest bail.
2.
The crime is registered on the basis of report lodged by ASI Kishor Anandrao Sherki alleging that he received a secret information that some persons are manufacturing the illicit liquor at Margasur Shivar and, therefore, he conducted a raid and during raid, stock of 1000 litre of concentrate which is used for manufacturing liquor
2 916.ABA.563-2025.odt was seized. During the enquiry with other co-accused, the name of the present Applicant revealed, who was illegally selling the raw material to the other co-accused for the purpose of manufacturing the illicit liquor.
3.
Heard learned Counsel for the Applicant who submitted that except the statement of the co-accused there is no other material to connect him with the alleged offence. He was not found at the spot of incident. In view of that, he be protected by granting anticipatory bail.
4.
Learned APP strongly opposed the said Application and submitted that huge stock was found during the raid, his custodial interrogation is required, and therefore, the Application deserves to the rejected.
5.
On hearing both the sides and on perusal of the investigation papers, admittedly, the Applicant was not found at the spot of incident. His involvement appears to be there, on the basis of the statement of the co-accused. He has already cooperated with the Investigating Agency and attended the Police Station. In view of that the interim protection granted to the present Applicant deserves to be confirmed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following order:
O R D E R
i.
The Application is allowed.
3 916.ABA.563-2025.odt ii.
The ad interim protection granted to the Applicant by order dated 30.07.2025, is hereby confirmed on the condition that, he shall attend the concerned Police Station once in a week i.e. on every Monday between 10.00 a.m. to 01.00 p.m. and shall cooperate with the Investigating Agency. iii.
The Applicant shall not indulge himself in similar type of activities and a single offence registered against him would lead to cancellation of bail. iv.
The Applicant shall not induce, threat or promise any witnesses who are acquainted with the facts of the case either personally or by way of electronic media.
6.
Pending application/s, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.
(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) SD. Bhimte Signed by: Mr.S.D.Bhimte Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 16/08/2025 14:25:36