Ramchandra Sonba Talwar And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra
Digitally signed by CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Date:
2025.07.23 21:31:13 +0530 CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2010 of 2025
1. Ramchandra Sonba Talwar Age 75 years, Occ. Agriculture,
2. Kamaji Sonba Talwar Age 58 years, Occ. Agriculture,
3. Pratik Kondiba Talwar Age 22 years, Occ. Student,
4. Hanmant Ramchandra Talwar Age 48 years, Occ. Agriculture,
5. Shakuntala Ramchandra Talwar Age 65 years, Occ. Housewife,
6. Sangita Kamaji Talwar Age 51 years, Occ. Housewife,
7. Rekha Khandu Talwar Age 40 years, Occ. Housewife,
8. Usha Kondiba Talwar Age 41years, Occ. Housewife,
9. Savita Hanmant Talwar Age 36 years, Occ. Housewife,
10. Pooja Satish Talwar Age 26 years, Occ. Housewife,
11. Savita Ananda Talwar, Age 32 years, Occ. Housewife, All R/o. Dhangarwadi, Tal. Khandala, Dist. Satara.
... Applicants versus The State of Maharashtra (Through API Shirwal Police Station, Satara)
...Respondent
---- Mr Rahul Dhaygude, for the Applicants.
Mr S S Pednekar, APP, for Respondent / State. ASI D H Pawara, Shirval Police Station, Dist. Satara, is present. ---- Coram: R.N. Laddha, J.
Date: 22 July 2025 P.C.:
The applicants apprehend arrest in connection with CR No.237 of 2025, registered at Shirwal Police Station, Satara, for offences punishable under Sections 119(1), 115(2), 189(2), 190, 351(2), 352, 79 and 324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and have preferred this application seeking prearrest bail. 2.
The prosecution alleges that on 1 July 2025, while the
informant and his family members were measuring a parcel of land, the applicants formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the informant. During the incident, they also snatched Rs.5,000/- and a gold chain from the informant, and further abused and threatened his mother and daughter. 3.
Mr Rahul Dhaygude, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants, asserts the applicants' innocence and contends that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the crime. He submits that the present FIR is a retaliatory measure to the existing civil dispute between the informant and the applicants over the land. According to the learned Counsel, even as per the FIR, no weapon has been used by the applicants. The alleged injuries sustained by the informant are simple in nature. There is nothing to be recovered or discovered from the applicants. Furthermore, a cross-FIR has been registered against the informant and his family members for the same incident. The learned Counsel further submits that the applicants are ready and willing to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court.
4.
Mr SS Pednekar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State, opposes the applicants' request for pre-arrest bail. He submits that the applicants have formed an unlawful assembly and assaulted the informant with
fist and kick blows. If granted bail, the applicants may tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.
5.
Upon perusing the records, it appears that a civil dispute exists between the informant and the applicants for land. The alleged incident occurred on 1 July 2025; however, the FIR was lodged only on 3 July 2025, without any plausible explanation for the delay. Notably, a counter-FIR has been filed by the applicant No.7 against the informant and his family on 1 July 2025 itself, which is prior in point of the time to the informant's present FIR. Furthermore, as per the allegations contained in the FIR, the applicants allegedly assaulted the informant and his family member using punches and kicks, and no weapon was used by them. The injuries suffered by the informant and his family members are simple in nature, and the allegations in the FIR are not in consonance with the injury certificate.
The investigation is at an advanced stage, and nothing remains to be recovered or discovered from the applicants. The prosecution's apprehensions about evidence tampering and witness influence can be addressed by imposing appropriate conditions. In the circumstances, this Court is inclined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicants.
ORDER
(i) In the event of the applicants'
arrest in connection with CR No.237 of 2025, registered at Shirwal Police Station, Satara, they shall be released on bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- each and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The applicants shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required by the investigating officer.
(iii) The applicants, themselves or through any other person, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.
6.
The application stands disposed of accordingly. [R.N. Laddha, J.]