Hindurao Ramchandra Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra
2025:BHC-AS:18477
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1010/2025 HINDURAO RAMCHANDRA PATIL ...APPLICANT VS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...RESPONDENT ...
Adv. Shabnam Shaikh for the Applicant.
Adv. Amit A. Palkar APP for the Respondent State. ...
CORAM
: RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATED : APRIL 21, 2025 P.C.:
1.
This is bail application filed by applicant u/s.482 of B.N.S.S. for grant of anticipatory bail in respect of C.R.No. WL-13/2025 registered at Range Forest Office, Gargoti U/s. U/s. 9, 39(1), (a)(b), (d), 39(2), 39(3) Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 r.w. section 50, 51 of the Indian Wild Life (Protection) Act, 2022.
2.
Based on the complaint filed, an FIR has been lodged. The role of the present applicant has been mentioned in the FIR. 3.
The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that prearrest bail application was filed in the Sessions Court by the present applicant. By an order dated 25 March 2025, interim protection was granted to the present applicant. Thereafter, by order dated 4 April
2025, the pre-arrest bail application filed by the present applicant was rejected by the Sessions Court. By an order dated 16 April 2025 interim protection was granted to the present applicant, who is a professor in Dudh Sagar Vidyaniketan Junior College. As far as the present applicant is concerned, the only allegation against him is that some parts of flesh of wide bore were found in his house. It is further alleged that he has thrown away the cooked flesh outside his house along with utensils used for cooking.
4.
In defence it is the case of the applicant that he is an active participant in the Morcha which was organized by the locals against the forest department as the farms of the locals were destroyed by wild buffalo and wide pigs. In retaliation, the forest official started taking action against the persons who had participated in the Morcha. The present applicant is victim of such action taken by the forest department and hence, on the false ground, an FIR has been lodged against the present applicant. The applicant is in noble profession of teaching. There is no antecedents against the present applicant. He is ready to cooperated with the police. Therefore, his custody is not required. 5.
The learned APP submits that there are 9 accused persons in the present FIR out of which 8 accused persons have been granted regular bail. If the accused is released on pre-arrest bail there is possibility that the applicant will tamper the evidence and pressurize
the witnesses. Therefore, the custody of the applicant is necessary. 6.
I have heard the counsel for both the sides and have gone through the FIR. Considering the submissions made in the anticipatory bail application and also considering that the present applicant is a teacher by profession and the alleged role of the present applicant is that some part of flesh of wild bore was found in his house and the said flesh was cooked and thrown away, and considering the fact that the applicant was an active participant in the Morcha against the forest official. In order to investigate the crime, evidence would be required. Therefore, I am of the view that at this state, the applicant needs to be protected from being arrested. Hence, I pass the following order.
ORDER
(a) The anticipatory bail application is allowed. (b) In the event of arrest in connection with Crime No. WL-13/2025 registered at Range Forest Office, Gargoti, the applicant shall be released on bail, on furnishing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs.30,000/- with one or more sureties of the like amount.
(c) The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and attend and meet the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station on 28 April 2025, 29 April 2025 and 30 April 2025 between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. and thereafter as and when called for.
(d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and further, the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence in any manner whatsoever.
(e) The applicants shall furnish details of his residential addresses, contact numbers and e-mail addresses to the Investigating Officer.
7.
Needless to say, violation of any of the aforesaid conditions would make the applicant liable to face proceedings for cancellation of anticipatory bail. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the question of grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant in the present application, and that the trial Court shall proceed further, without being influenced by the observations made in this order. 8.
The anticipatory bail application is disposed off. (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)