BA – 1969 / 2022, ABA – 1675 / 2022, ABA – 1676 / 2022,
1 of 4
ABA No. 1675 / 2022
Ganesh Suresh Tadge – State
MHCC020101352022
ABA No. 1676 / 2022
Mitesh Suresh Makwana – State
MHCC020101382022
BA No. 1969 / 2022
Darshan Chandrakant Chavan – State
MHCC020108882022
Common Order
(Pronounced on this 7th Day of September, 2022)
Applications pertains to Court Room No.17. As said
Court is vacant, arguments are heard by this in-charge Court and
applications are being put for Order.
2)
On 25.07.2022 at about 05:30 Hrs., Devanand
Konduskar, lodged complaint with allegations as follows;
On 27.07.2022 at about, informant was talking with
his friends as Babau,Vaibhav and Raja at their work
place. At that time, Darshan Chavan, Mitesh Makwana
and Ganesh Tadge (D.J.), who were under influence of
liquor, reached at the spot. When, informant restrained
Darshan Chavan from entering, Darshan abused and
threaten the informant. When, informant gave
understanding that, accused should not abuse, then
Darshan and his friends started beating complainant. At
that time Darshan took out Iron Rod and assaulted on
the head of informant.
Informant went to Rajawadi Hospital where
Doctor asked him to go for further treatment and CTScan at Sion Hospital. At Sion hospital Doctor asked the
informant to be indoor patient. However, there was no
bed available. Hence, informant went to Noor Hospital,
Mumbai and got himself admitted.

BA – 1969 / 2022, ABA – 1675 / 2022, ABA – 1676 / 2022,
2 of 4
3)
Crime No. 631 / 2022 was registered U / Sec. 326, 504
r / w Sec.34 of IPC. During investigation police added Sec. 307 in
aforesaid Crime.

Investigation:
4)
During investigation accused / applicant Darshan
Chavhan was arrested. Charge-sheet is yet to be filed.
Bail Applications :
5)
Darshan Chavan had preferred Bail Application No.
1969 / 2022, Ganesh Tadge has preferred Anticipatory Bail
Application No. 1675 / 2022 and Mitesh Makwana has preferred
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1676 / 2022.
6)
Heard Learned Adv. Shri Dilip P Parmar for all three
applicants. Heard Adv. Shri Pradeep Sawant for intervenor. Heard
Learned APP Ms. Ashwini Raikar for State. Perused papers.

Case of applicants :
7)
Common grounds on which applicants are seeking
anticipatory bail and Regular bail are as follows :
i. They have been falsely implicated in the Crime.
ii.

There is discrepancy regarding weapon as stated by the
complainant.

iii. There is discrepancy about number of assailants.
iv.

Informant / victim himself went to three different
hospitals for seeking favorable medical report.

v.

Applicants do not have any criminal antecedents.

vi. They are ready to abide by each and every condition.

Hence, they be released on bail.

Objections by Prosecution :
8)
Victim is seriously assaulted on head which is vital
organ on the body. Investigation is in progress. There are three
assailants, out of which, one is arrested and other two are
absconding. If, accused / applicants are released, then they may
BA – 1969 / 2022, ABA – 1675 / 2022, ABA – 1676 / 2022,
3 of 4
also abscond. they may pressurize victim and other witnesses.
Custodial interrogation of absconding co-accused is necessary.
Hence, applications be rejected.

Conclusion : Regarding Regular Bail Application of Accused
Darshan Chandrakant Chavan :
9)
Perusal of FIR shows that, incident occurred on 19:00
Hrs. of 24.07.2022. FIR was lodged at 01:00 Hrs. of 25.07.2022
i.e. within six hours.
In FIR, informant / victim has taken name of all three
applicants. It means there is proper identification of the assailants.
Assault is on head by means of Iron Rod. It means,
assault is on vital organ. The statements points active role of this
applicant in said attack. Hence, apprehension raised by
prosecution that, the accused / applicant if released, might
commit similar offenses against the victim or might abscond,
cannot be overlooked. Hence, at this stage, this applicant cannot
be made entitle for relief of bail.
Conclusion : Regarding Anticipatory Bail Application of Mitesh
and Ganesh @ D. J. :
10)
Allegations against these applicant is that, they gave
fists and blows at the time of incident.
In FIR, informant / victim has taken name of all three
applicants. It means there is proper identification of the assailants.
Over all statements of victim points active role of these
applicants at time of incident. Further, these applicants were
absconding from the time of occurrence of incident. So,
considering nature of offense and aspect pertaining to common
intention, prosecution cannot be denied an opportunity to
investigate these applicants. Again, apprehension raised by
prosecution that, applicants if released, might commit similar
offenses against victim or might abscond, cannot be overlooked.
The applicant have already shown the tendency to ran away from
the trial. Therefore, no case is made out by applicants for relief
of anticipatory bail.

BA – 1969 / 2022, ABA – 1675 / 2022, ABA – 1676 / 2022,
4 of 4
11)
Considering above discussion, following Order is
passed.
1.

2.

ORDER
Bail Application No. 1969 / 2022, Darshan Chavan –
State, Anticipatory Bail Application No.1675 / 2022,
Ganesh Tadge (D. J.) – State and Anticipatory Bail
Application No. 1676 / 2022 Mitesh Makwana – State,
are rejected.
Order dictated in presence of Adv. Dilip Parmar for
applicant, Adv. Pradeep Sawant for complainant and
APP Ashwini Raikar for State.

Place : Mumbai
Date : 07.09.2022
Vijay S. Hingne
I / c Additional Sessions Judge,
Court Room No. 23, Greater Mumbai
Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app “eCourts Services” from Android or iOS