Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
ADVAIT M.SETHNA
Mayur Balasaheb Somvanshi – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
1. The Applicant has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“ BNSS ”) as he apprehends his arrest.
2. These proceedings relate to CR No.0314 of 2024. The FIR has been lodged on 9 March 2024 at 16.08 hours by the Tophkhana Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar. The Sections invoked are 326, 307 (subsequently added), 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 427 (subsequently added), 504, 506 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (“IPC”) and Section 4 /24 of the ARMS ACT . There are 7 accused persons, the present Applicant being disclosed as accused No.1.
Case in the FIR:-
3. The complainant Ajay Karpe, aged 24 years lodged the report stating that his friend Vaibhav Sampat Baraskar was having a tea center. On 8 March 2024 at about 3.00 p.m., the present Applicant and 5 to 6 persons including the co-accused came inside the said premises and the other persons waited outside. Accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 i.e. Omkar Thombre, Abhi Tirandas and Tahir Shaikh came inside the premises and the other persons waited outside. The accused Nos.2 and 3 started saying how “dare they touch their bhai”. They threatening that the complainant should n
An anticipatory bail application cannot be denied solely based on the applicant's criminal antecedents, and cooperation with ongoing investigations can justify granting bail.
The Court's discretion for anticipatory bail hinges on the nature of offenses and necessity for custodial interrogation, requiring substantial justification from the State.
The court emphasized the necessity of custodial interrogation in serious offences, balancing individual rights against public interest, and found sufficient prima facie evidence of the applicant's in....
Anticipatory bail considerations include the nature of the offence and necessity for custodial interrogation, with the State required to provide substantial justification for such interrogation.
The court ruled that while serious allegations exist, custodial interrogation is not necessary for the accused, allowing pre-arrest bail with conditions.
Anticipatory bail should be denied when there is prima facie evidence of involvement in serious offenses, especially to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure a fair investigation.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
