Vishal Narayan Gadling v. State Of Maharashtra

1 12-ABA 3576-25.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3576 OF 2025 Vishal Narayan Gadling ... Applicant V/s.

State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ----- Mr. Advait Tamhankar for the Applicant.

Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent-State. API P. B. Suroshe, Goregaon PS is present.

----- CORAM :

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

05TH JANUARY 2026 P.C. :

Digitally signed by MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE Date:

2026.01.05 17:54:47 +0530 MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE 1.

This is an Application for anticipatory bail. 2.

The Applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.643 of 2025 registered with Goregaon Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 118(2), 189(1), 189(2), 189(4), 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that on the date of incident, which took place on 14th October 2025, the present Applicant along with other co-accused assaulted injured Pravin Bagadi with sticks on his head on account of previous enmity. It is alleged that due to the said assault, the injured sustained grievous injury to his head. 4.

I have heard Learned Counsel for the Applicant and Learned APP for the Respondent-State.

Mugdha

2 12-ABA 3576-25.doc 5.

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that though at the time of alleged incident, the Applicant was not present at the place of incident, due to previous enmity his name came to be mentioned in the FIR as one of the assailants. In support of the submissions, the Learned Counsel for the Applicant has drawn my attention to the FIR lodged by Sushant Pujari on the very same day. It is further submitted that there are no criminal antecedents against the Applicant and the Applicant is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation.

6.

On the other hand, Learned APP for the Respondent-State submits that the first informant, who is an eyewitness of the incident, has named the present Applicant as one of the assailants in the FIR. It is submitted that the injured sustained grievous injury on his head and was in the hospital for seven days. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the Applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail. 7.

I have perused the FIR. The present Applicant has assaulted the injured with a stick on his head. Prima-facie the first informant appears to be independent eyewitness. Considering the fact that the injured was assaulted on his head, I am not inclined to release the Applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the Anticipatory Bail Application is rejected. (N.R. BORKAR, J.) Mugdha