BAIL APPLN.No.1128/2022
(order below Exh.1)
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, NASHIK AT
NASHIK
CRI. BAIL APPLICATION NO.1128/2022

Avinash Eknath Mali,
]
Age 21 yrs., Occu – Education.

]
R/o.Nandgaon Sado, Tal.Igatpuri, ] Applicant/Accused
Dist.Nashik
V/s.

The State of Maharashtra
]
Through– P.I. Igatpuri Police Station, ]
Dist.Nashik.

]Prosecution/Respondent
Advocate Shri.A.I.Deshmukh for the applicant/accused.

APP Shri.S.G.Kadave for the State.

ORDER BELOW EXH.1
This is first anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant
Sections 438 of Criminal Procedure Code in connection with C.R.No.9/2022
registered with Igatpuri Police Station for the offence punishable under
Section-302, 307, 452, 427, 143, 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian
Penal Code and 37(3)(1) r/w.135 of the Mumbai Police Act and 4/25 of the
Arms Act.

2.

It is stated in the application that applicant/accused is student
and agriculturist and his family including his old aged mother, father and
brother are depend upon him. So far as case is concerned on 28.01.2022
there was quarrel took place among John Patric Manwel etc. and Mr.Hari
Bhandari etc. both r/o.Nandgaon Sado, Tal.Igatpuri, Dist.Nashik on the
ground of previous business enmity regarding business at Igatpuri Railway
Station. After the incident Vishal Khade had died while John Patric Manwel
son of informant treated and discharged from hospital. There is no evidence
against this applicant. Charge-sheet is filed and investigation is over.

Page 1 of 4
BAIL APPLN.No.1128/2022
(order below Exh.1)
3.

It is further stated that the FIR and charge-sheet nowhere
reveals overt act of applicant. Allegations against the applicant is without
concrete evidence.

4.

The prosecution has filed say and objected to released this
accused on pre-arrest bail on the count that the accused was absconding
since day of offence. Charge-sheet is filed under Section 299 of the Cr.P.C. He
has played vital role corroborated by CCTV Footage. His brother and other
accused Avinash and Bhushan Mali were absconding. In search of their house
8 sharp weapons seized by way of house search panchnama. Interrogation of
accused is necessary. Therefore, considering seriousness of offence and
chance to repeat the offence prayed to reject the bail application.

5.

Perused the application, say and charge-sheet.

6.

I have heard Ld. Adv. Shri.A.I. Deshmukh for the applicants. I
have heard Ld.APP Shri.Kadave. I have heard S.D.P.O. Shri.Arjun Bhosle.

7.

Ld. APP Shri. Kadave vehemently submitted that the accused
was absconding since day of offence. Charge-sheet is filed under Section 299
of the Cr.P.C. He has played vital role corroborated by CCTV Footage. His
brother and other accused Avinash and Bhushan Mali were absconding. In
search of their house 8 sharp weapons seized by way of house search
panchnama. Interrogation of accused is necessary. Therefore, considering
seriousness of offence and chance to repeat the offence prayed to reject the
bail application.

8.

Adv.Shri.Deshmukh vehemently submitted that there is no
criminal history of applicant/accused. He is ready to abide any condition
imposed on him. Ld. APP Shri.Kadave vehemently submitted that the said
incident occurred on day time, 30 to 40 persons have collectively assaulted
the son of first informant and his friends and in the said incident one Rahul
Page 2 of 4
BAIL APPLN.No.1128/2022
(order below Exh.1)
Ramesh Salve was murdered and son of first informant sustained grievous
injury. Ld.Adv. Deshmukh placed reliance on various citation as follows –
1)
Abhijeet Rajendra Sawant Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2017 CLU
896 (Bombay H.C.)

2)
Ramesh Iranna Bali Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2017 DGLS (SC)
1580.

3)
Nadeem Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra, 1010 ALL MR (Cri)
2551.

4)
Vinod Bhavarlal Mohata Vs. State of Maharashtra, LEX
(Bom)2010–3–96.

5)
Yunis & Anr Vs. State of U.P. 1999(2) Crimes 284 (Allahabad
H.C.)

6)
Suresh Krishnarao Pol Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2009 ALL MR
(Cri.) 3289.

7)
Matru @ Girish Chandra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, LEX(SC)
1971-3-46.

With due respect facts of all citations are not applicable to the case in hand.

9.

I have gone through the charge-sheet, FIR dated 28.1.2022 filed
by informant Aasha Patric Manwel, mother of injured, Francis @ Kavu Patric
Manwel. Brief facts of her complaint is that at 3.30 to 4.30 in the afternoon
while she was lodging complaint at Igatpur P.S. about morning incident of
pelting stone by 10 to 15 came on motorcycle of Nandgaon Sado. She came
to know that again these people came by walking and motorcycle towards
her home alongwith sticks, knife and sword. Her son and friends started
running when these people assaulted Rahul Ramesh Salve (deceased),
Francis @ Kavu Patric Manwel, John @ Chota Papa Patric Manwel, Vishal
Hanumant Khade, Sanju @ Sonu Mastan, Mohan Raut, Faijan Shaikh and
Bhushan Ahire. Hari Bhandari assaulted by knife on head, face, ribs, hands
and legs on Ramesh Salve. Rahul was caught hold by Sonu Gupta (B-
Summary Report) and Mayur Mali (applicant), Bhusan Mali (absconding)
and Ganesh Moule (absconding). She further states that Sonu Gupta
assaulted with knife on neck of Francis @ Kavu Patric Manwel, victim was
caught hold by Mobin Shaikh (B-summary report) and Sagar Dal Bhagat
(B-summary report). She further states Krushna Narayan Bhagde, Balu
Page 3 of 4
BAIL APPLN.No.1128/2022
(order below Exh.1)
Gangurde, Namdeo Mhasne, Gangaram Vitthal Bhagade (applicant no.1)
Vitthal Keru Bhagde, Suraj Ramdas Bhagade (applicant no.2) assaulted on
injured i.e. John @ Chota Papa Patric Manwel, Vishal Hanumant Khade,
Sanju @ Sonu Mashan Mohan Raut, Faijan Shaikh and Bhushan Ahire with
the help of sticks and ran away. While returning back Vitthal Keru Kokate
and Kalu Punja Sadgir damaged door and windows of informant’s house. Her
son was admitted at hospital and Rahul Salve succumbed to injury.

10.

There is substance in the arguments advanced by Ld. APP
Shri.Kadave that accused was absconding since the day of incident.

8 weapons found from the house of the accused. The source of weapons and
nexus in connection with the offence needs to be interrogated and for which
physical custody of this accused is material. FIR reveals the name of this
applicant. Mere filing of charge-sheet under Section 299 of the Cr.P.C. against
this accused cannot be ground to give benefit of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. He
does not deserves sympathy for prayer of bail. Considering the circumstances
and seizure of weapons at his home and he was absconding. His custodial
interrogation is required.

11.

Considering the overall submissions by both the parties, perusal
of the charge-sheet, statement of witnesses and CCTV footage I am of the
considered opinion that applicant/accused is not entitled to release on
pre-arrest bail. Hence, following order is passed –
O R D E R
1.

Anticipatory bail application is rejected being devoid of
merits.

2.

Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of
accordingly.

Digitally signed by
UMESHCHANDRA
UMESHCHANDRA JAIKUMAR MORE
JAIKUMAR MORE
Date: 2022.10.01
15:01:39 +0530

(Dr. U.J. More)
Nashik.

Additional Sessions Judge
Date : 01.10.2022
Nashik.

Page 4 of 4