19-ABA-145-2021.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 145 OF 2021

1. Amol Abhiman Bhamare

2. Dnyaneshwar Sampat Bhamare

.... Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

.... Respondent

______

Mr.Mahendra Sandhyanshiv, for the Applicant.

Mr. S.H. Yadav, APP for the State/Respondent.

______

CORAM:SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE

:18^th JANUARY, 2021

P.C. :

1.

The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in

connection with C.R.No. 15 of 2020 registered at Vander

Khakurdi Police Station, Nasik on 20^th January 2020 under

sections 307, 326, 324, 143, 147,148,149,504,506 of the

Indian Penal Code.

2.

Though the ofence is registered in January

2020, till today, the applicants are not arrested. The

investigation as far as the other accused is concerned, is

over and charge-sheet is fled.

y.s.patil

1 of 4

19-ABA-145-2021.odt

3.

Heard Mr. Mahendra Sandhyanshiv, the learned

counsel for the Applicant and Mr. S.H. Yadav, the the

learned APP for the State.

4.

The FIR is lodged by one Nilesh Bagul. He has

stated that on 6^th January 2020, on previous enmity,

about 13 persons went to the house of one Bhau Saheb

Ragho Bhanmare where the informant and his family

members were invited for lunch. The accused were

carrying weapons, like iron-rods and wooden sticks.

F.I.R. narrates the actual assault. The informant Nilesh,

his father Shailendrasingh Bagul, Bapu Borse, informant’s

uncle Dinesh Singh and Bhagwan Singh had sufered

injuries in the incident. It is specifcally mentioned that

applicant No. 1 gave a blow with iron rod on the head of

informant. On this basis, the FIR is lodged.

5.

The learned Counsel for the applicant

submitted that the injury sufered by Nilesh and

Shailendra are described as simple injuries. No other

y.s.patil

2 of 4

19-ABA-145-2021.odt

assault or injury is attributed to the present applicants

and, therefore, they deserves protection of anticipatory

bail. He submitted that the other accused are granted

regular bail.

6.

The learned A.P.P. opposed the application on

the basis of allegations made in the FIR.

7.

I have perused the injury certifcate. I have

also perused the statement of other eye witnesses

namely Bhausaheb Bhamare, Yogesh Bhamare, Anita

Bhamare, Nilima Bhamare, Vinod Bhamare, Archana

Bhamare and others. Thus there are many eye witnesses

to the incident. The occurrence of the incident cannot be

doubted.

8.

Injury sufered by the informant Nilesh was on

the head. He has sufered CLW on the frontal bone of the

size of 8 cm x0.5 cm x0.5cm. Thus, a blow was given by

applicant no. 1 on the informant’s head causing injury of

y.s.patil

3 of 4

19-ABA-145-2021.odt

8 cm in length. This blow can fall within the meaning of

Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

9.

Injured Bapu has lost his two teeth and,

therefore, it was a grievous injury. Injured Dinesh had

injury on his forearm causing fracture. It was also a

grievous injury.

10.

All the assailants had come together by

forming an unlawful assembly and therefore, at this stage

of consideration of anticipatory bail, their roles cannot be

separated. The ofence was committed with pre

meditation and planning with common object to cause

grevious injuries. The ofence is serious. The Applicants

cannot be granted anticipatory bail. Hence, the

application stands rejected.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

y.s.patil

4 of 4