: 1 :

37 & 40-aba-469 & 472-21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 469 OF 2021

Ganesh Deepak Bhople

.... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

.... Respondent

WITH

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 472 OF 2021

Poonam Ganesh Bhople

.... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

.... Respondent

______

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi for Applicants in both ABAs.

Mrs. J. S. Lohokare, APP for State/Respondent in ABA/472/21.

Mr. S. H. Yadav, APP for State/Respondent in ABA/469/21.

______

CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE

: 18^th FEBRUARY, 2021

P.C. :

1.

Both these applications are decided by this common

order as they arise out of the same offence and the same

investigation. For the sake of convenience, both the applicants are

referred to by their names.

2.

Heard Shri. Satyavrat Joshi, learned counsel for the

1 of 5

Gokhale

: 2 :

37 & 40-aba-469 & 472-21.odt

applicants, Shri. Yadav, learned APP for the State in ABA No.469 of

2021 and Smt. Lohokare, learned APP for the State in ABA No.472

of 2021.

3.

The Applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in

connection with C.R.No.480 of 2020 registered with Vadgaon

Police Station, Kolhapur under sections 353, 283, 143, 147, 186,

504 and 506 r/w. 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’)

and under sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Prevention of

Defacement of Property Act, 1995.

4.

The First Information Report (for short ‘

F.I.R.) is

lodged by Police Constable Ranveer Jadhav attached to Vadgaon

police station. He has stated that, on 11/12/2020, the senior

police officers and the informant had gone to Vathar village for

generally supervising law and order situation there. The villagers

made a complaint that one Deepak Bhople had placed an

advertisement board in front of his shop which was causing

obstruction to traffic. The police party went there. They found

substance in the grievance and, therefore, Deepak Bhople was

asked to remove that advertisement board. He had agreed to do

2 of 5

: 3 :

37 & 40-aba-469 & 472-21.odt

that. On 20/12/2020 again police party was passing through that

road. They saw that around 9:30p.m. there was heavy traffic on

that particular road and there was traffic jam. The police found

that cause of that traffic was the same poster. It was not removed

by Deepak Bhople. Police went to him and asked him to remove

that board. Deepak Bhople got angry and started quarreling with

the police. He pushed one officer Dheeraj. It is alleged that,

present applicant Ganesh was Deepak’

s son. Applicant Poonam was

applicant Ganesh’

s wife. Both of them and unknown persons

joined Deepak Bhople and told the police that they would not

remove the board and that they would even commit suicide.

Deepak Bhople started banging his head on the floor. Police tried

to pacify him. Deepak’

s daughters came there and started making

false allegations and threatening the police party. On these

allegations the F.I.R. was lodged.

5.

Shri. Joshi submitted that, in the entire F.I.R.

allegations against the present applicants are much lesser

compared to Deepak Bhople. Only non bailable office alleged

against the applicants is under section 353 of IP.C. But that offence

3 of 5

: 4 :

37 & 40-aba-469 & 472-21.odt

is not made out against the applicants. Therefore they deserve

protection of anticipatory bail.

6.

Learned APP, on instructions, stated that the main

accused Deepak is already arrested. They submitted that the

applicants’ role also cannot be ignored and leniency cannot be

shown to them.

7.

I have considered these submissions. As rightly pointed

out by Shri. Joshi, F.I.R. does not show any allegations against the

present applicants mentioning that they had assaulted the police

officers or had used criminal force. All these allegations are

directed against Deepak Bhopse. Considering this lesser role

played