Bombay High Court
Amar Arjun Mudgal vs The State Of Maharashtra on 31 August, 2018
Author: Vibha Kankanwadi
Bench: T.V. Nalawade, Vibha Kankanwadi
1 CriApl 547,552/18
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
910 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 547 OF 2018
BABASAHEB BHIMRAJ MUDGAL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 552 OF 2018
[1] AMAR ARJUN MUDGAL
[2] SACHIN LAXMAN MUDGAL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
...
Advocate for Appellants : Mr. Jadhav Satej S.
APP for Respondent/State : Mr. P.V. Diggikar
Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Jagtap A.B.
...
CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE AND
SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI,JJ.
DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2018
PER COURT :
Both the appeals are filed to challenge the
order made on Exhibit-1 of Bail Application
No.1355/2018, which was pending in the Court of
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar. The
application was filed for bail by the appellants in
Crime No.I-271/2018 registered with Kotwali Police
Station Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under
::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 06/09/2018 00:10:17 :::
2 CriApl 547,552/18
Sections 397, 307 of the Indian Penal Code, under
Section 4/25 of the Arms Act and also under Sections
3[1][R][S], 3[2][V-A] of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes [Prevention of Atrocities] Act.
2. The crime is registered on the basis of
report given by the respondent No.2 Ajay Raju Wadekar.
He has a friend by name Gajendra Dangat, who is an
Advocate. As Ajay was keeping contact with Gajendra
Dangat, appellants were quarreling with him. One
Datta had strained relations with Gajendra and the
appellants are relatives of Dattatray Mudgal.
3. The incident took place on 30.06.2018 at
about 07.30 p.m. It is the contention of the first
informant that when they were proceeding on motorcycle
to the office of Advocate Mr. Dangat, all the
appellants intercepted him. He had virtually reached
office of the Advocate. The allegations are made that
appellant/accused Devidas was holding razor [wastara].
Dattatray was holding sword and other accused were
holding weapons like sticks and iron rods. The
allegations are made that all the accused gave abuses
to him by taking name of his caste which is Scheduled
Caste and when the incident was taking place, Mr.
Dangat came there. The allegations are made that
Devidas then assaulted by razor to Gajendra and
Dattatray gave blow of stick on the face of Gajendra.
::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 06/09/2018 00:10:17 :::
3 CriApl 547,552/18
The allegations are made that Amar Mudgal snatched
gold chain of Gajendra. The report was given on
31.06.2018.
4. This Court has seen the Injury Certificate of
Mr. Dangat, who was examined on 30.06.2018. It shows
that there were fracture and multiple injuries on his
neck and chin. One of the injuries was grievous one.
5. The submissions made show that some accused
were arrested on 01.07.2018 and some were arrested
afterwards. Though the crime was registered for the
aforesaid offences, the material is of the aforesaid
nature and there was previous dispute between the
appellants and aforesaid Dangat. No other prior
incidents are on record as against the appellants. In
view of nature of the dispute between the parties and
the circumstance that in respect of incident dated
30.06.2018, F.I.R. was given by side of the appellants
and crime was registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 326, 323, 504, 506, 143, 147,148, 149
of the Indian Penal Code against Gajendra Dangat and
five persons from his side, this Court holds that it
is not desirable to keep the appellants behind bars
till the disposal of the case which may be filed
against them. In the result, we pass the following
order :
::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 06/09/2018 00:10:17 :::
4 CriApl 547,552/18
O R D E R
[1] Both the Appeals are allowed.
[2] The order made by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.1355/2018 dated 03.08.2018 is hereby set aside. The applications filed for bail are allowed.
[3] All the appellants are to be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. and S.B. of Rs.15,000/- each and on furnishing one solvent surety each in the like amount. They shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses, shall not influence them.
[SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI,J.] [T.V. NALAWADE, J.] SRM/31/8/18 ::: Uploaded on - 05/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 06/09/2018 00:10:17 :::