{1}

ABA 853 & 854.21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 853 OF 2021

ANAND KAILAS DHAS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

…

Mr. R.R. Karpe, Advocate for the applicant,

Mr. S.D. Ghayal, APP for the respondent.

With

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 854 OF 2021

NAVNATH BAJIRAO DHAS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

…

Mr. R.R. Karpe, Advocate for the applicant,

Mr. S.D. Ghayal, APP for the respondent.

CORAM : V.G. BISHT, J.

DATE : 13^th August.2021.

PER COURT:

1]

These are applications under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. preferred

by the applicants seeking grant of pre-arrest bail in connection with

Crime No.0262 of 2021, registered with Police Station, Benwandi, Dist.

Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148,

452, 327, 354(B), 323, 504, 506 of IPC.

2]

On account of on-going land dispute in a civil court, on

23.6.2021, at about 6.00 a.m., while the informant alongwith other

family members was present in her house, her distant relatives, namely,

{2}

ABA 853 & 854.21.odt

Atmaram Bajirao Dhas, Navnath Bajirao Dhas (applicant), Devraj

Atmaram Dhas, Anand Kailas Dhas (applicant), Bajirao Babu Dhas,

Savita Atmaram Dhas, Subhadra Atmaram Dhas and Pushpa Kailas Dhas,

assembled in front of her house and started abusing her. The applicants

entered into her house, caught hold of her hand and tore her blouse.

Even, they forcibly snatched Mangalsutra.

3]

Mr. Karpe, learned counsel for the applicant, invited my

attention to the FIR No. 258 of 2021 filed by applicant Savita Atmaram

Dhas against the members of informant party on 23.6.2021, at about

15.06 P.M., arising out of the same incident. According to learned

counsel, the present FIR No. 262 of 2021, came to be filed at about 1.43

A.M. on 23.6.2021. Thus, according to learned counsel, their FIR was

first in point of time and as a counter-blast to the said FIR, the present

informant deliberately and identically filed the complaint. The learned

counsel next submitted that there is mis-application of Section 327 of

IPC, inasmuch as, there was no voluntary act of causing hurt so as to

extort property or valuable security. The whole alleged incident should

be looked in the backdrop of the pendency of the civil dispute between

the parties and thus, it would be clear that the present applicants are

falsely implicated.

4]

Mr, S.D. Ghayal, learned APP, on the other hand, submitted

that there is no delay in lodging the FIR. Not only the applicants used

criminal force against the informant but also snatched Mangalsutra of the

informant. The respective roles of the applicants have been clearly

specified and this being so, the application should not be entertained and

needs to be rejected.

{3}

ABA 853 & 854.21.odt

5]

On going through both the FIRs, I find substance in the

argument of the learned counsel for the applicant that their FIR was filed

first in point of time arising out of the same incident and what is

interesting to note is that the contents of their FIR are identically

reflected in the FIR filed by the present informant. One can also not be

oblivious of the fact that a civil dispute is going on between the parties.

As far as the applicability of Section 327 is concerned, this Court, prima-

facie, has its doubts.

6]

Thus, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the

case, the present application needs to be allowed with certain conditions.

Hence, I pass the following order.

: O R D E R :

[I]

In the event of arrest of the applicants in connection

with Crime No. 0262 of 2021, registered with Police Station, Benwandi,

Dist. Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Section