VASANTRAO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
LAWS(BOM)-2020-7-117
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on July 17,2020

VASANTRAO Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

MANGESH S.PATIL,J. - (1.) This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicants are seeking bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.117/2020 registered with Aundha Nagnath Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 307 , 326 , 143 , 144 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 323 , 504 , 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) Shortly stated the allegations as can be discerned from the FIR and the Police papers are to the effect that a meeting was arranged for partition of lands between the family of the informant and that of the applicants on 10.05.2020 at 22.00 hours. It is alleged that when the informant and his elder brother Gajanan where deliberating about the manner of partition, the applicant No.1 insisted that a larger chunk of land should be allotted to his share. Suddenly he got up, took out a packet containing chilly powder and splashed it on the informant and Gajanan's face. It is thereafter that all the applicants started assaulting the informant and his brother. When there mother Savitribai tried to intervene by rushing to the spot even she was assaulted. The injured persons were taken to the Government Hospital at Aundha Nagnath and thereafter to the Civil Hospital at Hingoli and later on to the Civil Hospital, Nanded. The FIR was lodged on 13.05.2020 and the offence was registered.
(3.) The learned advocate for the applicants submits that there is enormous and unexplained delay in lodging of the FIR which smacks of concoction. He points out that in fact the informant and his brother were the aggressors and had assaulted the applicant No.5 in the same meeting about which FIR was lodged promptly on the very next morning i.e. 11.05.2020 and Crime No.114/2020 was registered. It is only by way of an after thought, the present FIR has been lodged with imaginary version. No episode as narrated in the FIR had taken place. The incident had occurred on the spur of moment. Deliberations were going on regarding partition of the properties. No deadly weapons were used. The persons who are not at all concerned with the partition like the applicant nos. 1 to 3 have also been roped in. The learned advocate further points out that in spite of several opportunities the prosecutor was unable to produce the injury certificates. No grievous injuries were sustained by either the informant or any other person. There are no criminal antecedents. The applicants are ready to cooperate the Investigating Officer and the application may be allowed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.