Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Pandit Tukaram Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra on 26 November, 2018

Author: Prakash D. Naik

Bench: Prakash D. Naik

       Sknair                                               38-aba-2407-18.odt

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


        ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2407 OF 2018


 Pandit Tukaram Patil                                 ... Applicant
       Vs.
 State of Maharashtra                                 ... Respondent
                                 ...
 Ms. Sushma T. Mishra for the applicant.
 Mr. A.R. Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent-State.
                                 ...
                               CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
                               DATE : 26th NOVEMBER, 2018.

 P.C.

 1.       This is an application for anticipatory bail in connection with

 CR No. I-246 of 2018 registered with Hill Line Police Station for

 offence punishable under Sections 307, 452, 504, 143, 147, 149 of

 Indian Penal Code and section 37(3) and 135 of Maharashtra

 Police Act.

 2        The case of the prosecution is that the informant lodged his

 report to police on 5th October, 2018. It is alleged that Yuvraj Patil

 and Pratap Patil gave dash of their scooty to the Alto Car of the

 informant. Hearing sound of dash, informant and her husband

 came out of the house and they saw that the number plate of the

 car was broken and smoke was coming out from the engine of the



                                                                             1 of 5



::: Uploaded on - 03/12/2018                 ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2018 08:41:42 :::
        Sknair                                              38-aba-2407-18.odt

 vehicle. The husband of the informant asked the applicant and

 Pratap Patil as to why they gave dash to the vehicle. They started

 abusing the informant and her husband. Informant's husband

 demanded compensation for the damage caused to the car.

 Accused abused the informant and her husband and went away.

 After some time the applicant and Pratap Patil along with other

 persons came at the scene of offence. They were armed with sword

 and sticks. They started abusing the informant and her husband.

 They threatened the complainant's husband that he would be

 killed. Thereafter, all of them dragged the injured out of the house.

 Informant's mother-in-law tried to intervene. The accused

 assaulted informant's husband by sticks. One of the accused gave a

 blow of sword to cause injuries to the informant's husband, but,

 mother-in-law came in between and sustained inquiry on her left

 hand finger. All the accused had assaulted by sticks to informant's

 mother-in-law as a result of which her hand was fractured. At that

 time Jagdish Patil and Ashok Patil assaulted with stick to the

 informant's husband with intention to kill him. Hence, FIR was

 lodged.

 3.       It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that

 on account of enmity, the applicant has been falsely implicated in

                                                                            2 of 5



::: Uploaded on - 03/12/2018                ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2018 08:41:42 :::
        Sknair                                             38-aba-2407-18.odt

 this case. It is submitted that applicant is disabled person which is

 evident from the certificate annexed to this application. Certificate

 indicate that the applicant is physically handicapped on account of

 post polio residual paralysis left limb RPD 60% (Sesctycally). It is

 submitted that the First Information Report alleges that the

 applicant was armed with the sword and assaulted witness

 Changulabai and also assaulted to another witness Darshan by

 sword. It is the case of the prosecution is that the applicant was

 armed with sword and subsequently he took wooden stick from

 the other accused and assaulted the witness Darshan Patil. It is

 submitted that injured Changulabai has sustained minor injury to

 her finger and Darshan Patil had sustained fracture. Taking into

 consideration both the injuries, Section 307 of Indian Penal Code

 would not be attracted. It is also pointed out that one of the

 accused had sustained contusion lacerated wound, however the

 complaint was not registered by the police. It is also submitted

 that due to dispute between the families, the applicant has been

 falsely implicated in this crime.

 4.       Learned APP strongly opposed the grant of anticipatory bail.

 It is submitted that old lady Changulabai had sustained injury

 towards the finger due to assaulted by the sword at the instance of

                                                                           3 of 5



::: Uploaded on - 03/12/2018               ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2018 08:41:42 :::
        Sknair                                                 38-aba-2407-18.odt

 the applicant. He further submitted that other witnesses were also

 assaulted by the applicant by wooden log.                  The injuries was

 serious. The disability certificate relied upon by the applicant does

 not indicate that the applicant was not in a position to move or

 commit such act. Investigation is in progress. The case for grant

 of anticipatory bail is not made out.              Hence, application be

 rejected.

 5.       On perusal of the First Information Report and other

 documents, it appears that the cause of incident in respect of dash

 given by the son of the applicant to the vehicle of the opponents.

 There was quarrel between both the families which has resulted

 into assault as referred herein above.           Admittedly, the witness

 Changulabai had intervened to save her son from being assaulted

 and at that time she had sustained blow by sword which has

 resulted injury to her finger. The injury sustained by other witness

 Darshan Patil would not be sufficient to invoke the charge under

 Section 307 of Indian Penal Code.              Applicant appears to be

 disabled person.              It would not be appropriate to scan and

 appreciate the evidence at this stage. However, considering the

 nature and the circumstances as stated herein above, applicant

 need not be subjected to police custody. In the circumstances, the

                                                                               4 of 5



::: Uploaded on - 03/12/2018                   ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2018 08:41:42 :::
         Sknair                                               38-aba-2407-18.odt

 case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out.

                                   ORDER

i. Anticipatory bail application is allowed; ii. In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with C.R. No. I-246 of 2018 registered with Hill-line Police Station, Kalyan, District Thane, he may be released on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount;

iii. Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer once in a week on Friday between 10 a.m. to 12 noon till filing of the chargesheet;

iv. Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence; v. Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed off.

( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. ) 5 of 5 ::: Uploaded on - 03/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2018 08:41:42 :::