1/4 42 BA-631.21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BAIL APPLICATION NO.631 OF 2021

Sambhaji @ Rohit Anna Bhosale

..

Applicant

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra

..

Respondent

…

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi i/b Mr. Nitesh J. Mohite for the Applicant.

Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, A.P.P. for the State.

…

CORAM

: SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J.

DATED

: 03^RD AUGUST, 2021.

P.C:-

1.

The Applicant is arraigned as an accused in C.R. No.743 of

2020 registered with Loni Kalbhor Police Station, Dist. Pune,

which invokes offences punishable under Sections 307, 143,

144, 147, 148, 149, 452, 427 of the IPC and Section 4(25) of the

Arms Act. In connection with the said crime, the Applicant is

arrested on 13/10/2020 and, since then, he is incarcerated. The

charge-sheet has been filed and, pursuant thereto, his application

filed in the Sessions Court came to be rejected.

AJN

2/4 42 BA-631.21.odt

2.

The Complainant is one Shankar Jedhe, who works as

Manager with Bajaj Finance Company. He also has a business

of Family Restaurant & Bar in partnership, which he attends at

8.00 p.m. onwards. On the date of the incident i.e. on

04/10/2020, when he was present in the restaurant along with the

staff, it is alleged that the present Applicant along with other co-

accused arrived at the hotel and ordered for liquor. His partner

was on the counter and it is alleged that the Applicant suddenly

started abusing and created ruckus by braking the articles,

though requested repeatedly, he did not desist, which prompted

the staff of the restaurant to throw him out. To take revenge of

the aforesaid incident, the Applicant along with the co-accused,

totalling 10-12 persons, again came to the said restaurant at

10.45 p.m. and they broke the glasses of various vehicles parked

there and barged into the hotel. The Applicant assaulted the

Complainant by scythe and it is stated by him that he assaulted

him in his head and he took the blow on his right hand causing

an injury. However, though he avoided the first blow, the

Applicant is alleged to have again assaulted him in his head and,

thereafter, when he fell down, other accused persons assaulted

him by kicks and blows.

3.

The injury certificate compiled in the charge-sheet depicts

the following injuries.

AJN

3/4 42 BA-631.21.odt

“1. CLW over right parietal scalp size 2 x 5 x 0.2

cm.

2.

CLW over right forearm flexor aspect size 6 x 4

x 2 cm. exposed bones cut tendons of flexor

muscles.

3.

CLW over right forearm exterior aspect size 1 x

0.5 x 0.2 cm.

4.

CLW over left knee 4x0.5 cm superficial

5.

Puncture wound over exterior forearm

6.

Swelling and deformity of left forearm.”

4.

The certificate records fracture of left shaft of ulna and

linear depressed fracture of right parietal bone of skull. The

statements of the eye-witnesses are also compiled in the charge-

sheet, who have specifically named the Applicant as assailant,

who assaulted the Complainant resulting into injury. Prima

facie, when a person is charged under Section 307 of the IPC, it

is the knowledge on the part of the person that the said injury

would result into his death is sufficient and, in the present case,

the intention of the Applicant is very apparent that to take

revenge of the first incident, he came back armed with a weapon

and attacked the Complainant on his head knowing very well

that he could have caused an injury which could have resulted in

his death. In such circumstances, the ingredients of offence

under Section 307 of the IPC is clearly made out. Considering

the totality of the circumstances and the material compiled in the

charge-sheet, the Applicant does not deserve to be released on