Bombay High Court
Omprakash S/O Khileshwar Choudhar vs State Of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps Ravanwadi, ... on 15 September, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:9074
1 15-BA 214.2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 214 OF 2025
( Omprakash s/o Khileshwar Choudhary vs. State of Maharashtra through PSO PS
Ravanwadi, District - Gondia )
Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders or the directions, Court's or Judge's order
and Registrar's orders.
Ms. F.N.Haidari, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. A.J.Gohokar, APP for respondent-State.
CORAM : VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 15, 2025
1) This is a second bail application filed by the applicant seeking grant of regular bail. The applicant is arrested in Crime No.281/2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 364, 386, 341, 143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2) It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant, along with 18 other co-accused, assaulted the deceased, making allegations that he had given fake gold chandelier. All of them beat three persons, one of them died, and two of them sustained grievous injuries.
3) Learned counsel for the applicant stated that at the time of withdrawal of the first bail application, it was not brought to the notice of this Court that some of the accused having similar role were already released on bail or some of them are protected by granting anticipatory bail. Thereafter, on the ground of parity this application is filed.
4) Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that beating with a wooden stick did not cause death. The role KOLHE 2 15-BA 214.2025.odt attributed to the present applicant is that of assault by stick. The deceased did not die because of the injuries caused due to the beating with a wooden stick, so also the accused persons, having a similar role, have already been released on bail, hence prayed for the release of the present applicant on the ground of parity.
3) Learned APP strongly opposed the application stating that accused Nos.14 to 18 are still absconding. The post- mortem report shows that the death of the deceased was due to liver injury and small intestinal haemorrhage, it can be because of beating by a wooden stick, which is a hard object. The specific role attributed to the applicant is mentioned in the FIR, therefore, prayed for rejection of the bail application.
4) Heard learned counsel for both the parties. This is a second bail application after withdrawal of the first bail application. While the withdrawal of the earlier bail application, liberty was not granted by the Court. The applicant is claiming parity, as when she withdrew the application, the earlier release of the accused was not brought to the notice of this Court.
5) On perusal of the record, it appears that the specific role is attributed to the applicant. He had assaulted the deceased with a wooden stick. There is every possibility of injury to the liver by the assault of a wooden stick. Considering the specific role played by the applicant, parity is not available to him. Hence, the application is rejected.
( VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J. ) KOLHE Signed by: Mr. Ravikant Kolhe Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 15/09/2025 19:26:02