Case Note & Summary
The applicants, Yogesh Gite, Ankit Asawa, Krishna Asawa, Govind Asawa, Tarabai Asawa, and Santosh Gadekar, filed an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 112 of 2017 registered at Rahuri Police Station, District Ahmednagar, for offences punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The first informant, Purushottam Asawa, alleged that on 26th April 2017, the applicants assaulted him with sticks and kicks, causing injuries. The applicants argued that they were falsely implicated due to a land dispute and that the injuries were simple in nature, not indicating any intention to cause death. The State opposed the bail application, contending that the offence was serious. The court, after hearing the parties, noted that the medical evidence showed only simple injuries and that there was no prima facie case under Section 307 IPC as the intention to kill was absent. The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicants, subject to conditions, including that they shall not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Section 438 Cr.P.C. - Offence under Section 307 IPC - The court considered whether the applicants, who were accused of attempting to murder the complainant, should be granted pre-arrest bail. The court examined the nature of injuries and the lack of intention to cause death. Held that since the injuries were simple and there was no intention to kill, anticipatory bail should be granted (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicants are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with an offence under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC.
Final Decision
The court allowed the application and granted anticipatory bail to the applicants on certain conditions, including that they shall not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.
Law Points
- Anticipatory bail
- Section 307 IPC
- prima facie case
- intention to kill
- nature of injuries
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (10) 36
Criminal Application No.3897 of 2017
S.S. Shinde, Mangesh S. Patil
Mr. Kunal A. Kale for applicants, Mr. A.R. Kale APP for State, Mr. Sandip R. Andhale for respondent no.2
Yogesh s/o. Arjun Gite, Ankit s/o. Govind Asawa, Krishna s/o. Govind Asawa, Govind s/o. Ratanlal Asawa, Tarabai w/o. Ratanlal Asawa, Santosh s/o. Sahebrao Gadekar
The State of Maharashtra, Purushottam s/o. Ratanlal Asawa
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Remedy Sought
Applicants sought pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.112/2017 for offences under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC.
Filing Reason
Applicants apprehended arrest on the basis of a complaint filed by Purushottam Asawa alleging assault with sticks and kicks.
Previous Decisions
Application of applicant nos.1 to 4 and 6 was dismissed as withdrawn as per Court's order dated 10.08.2017.
Issues
Whether the applicants have made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Whether the allegations prima facie constitute an offence under Section 307 IPC.
Submissions/Arguments
Applicants submitted that they are falsely implicated due to land dispute and that the injuries are simple, not indicating intention to cause death.
State opposed bail, arguing that the offence is serious and that the applicants may tamper with evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
For the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the court must consider the nature and gravity of the accusation, the antecedents of the applicant, and the possibility of the applicant fleeing from justice. In this case, the injuries were simple and there was no prima facie case under Section 307 IPC, hence bail was granted.
Judgment Excerpts
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for respondent no.2.
Considering the nature of the allegations and the injuries sustained, we are inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicants.
Procedural History
The applicants filed Criminal Application No.3897 of 2017 before the High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, seeking anticipatory bail. The application of applicant nos.1 to 4 and 6 was dismissed as withdrawn on 10.08.2017. The remaining applicant (no.5) pursued the application. After hearing the parties, the court granted anticipatory bail on 11.10.2017.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.): Section 438
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): Section 307, Section 34
