BAIL APPLN.No.1010/2022
(order below Exh.1)
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, NASHIK AT
NASHIK
CRI. BAIL APPLICATION NO.1010/2022
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Gangaram Vitthal Bhagde,
Suraj Ramdas Bhagde,
Pandhari Baburao Bhagde,
Sanjay Pandurang Bhagde,
Dnaneshwar @ Barkya Tukaram Bhagde,
Shishupal Shankar Bhagde,
Pintya @ Mohan Ratan Chavan,
Roshan Tanaji Bhagde,
Jagdish Prakash Bhagde,
Rahul Bhoru Bhagde,
Shankar Madhukar Chavhan,
Rohit Vasudeo Bhagde,
Ravi Janardhan Bhagde,
Shailesh Laxman Mahsne,
Sandip Harishchandra Rakshe,
Vishal Raju Bhagde
All R/o.Nandgaon Sado, Tal.Igatpuri,
Dist.Nashik
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
] Applicants/Accused
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 bail application filed by the applicant no.1 to 16
under Sections 439 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.

Page 1 of 6
BAIL APPLN.No.1010/2022
(order below Exh.1)
2.

It is stated in the application that applicants are arrested in the
above mentioned offence on 6.8.2022 and produced before Ld. J.M.F.C.
Igatpuri on 7.8.2022 and as investigation in this offence is completed and
charge-sheet is filed. The prosecution themselves asked for MCR to
applicants hence Ld. Trial Court granted MCR to applicants while applicant
no.1 (Gangaram Bhagde) granted two days PCR and thereafter accused were
sent to Central Jail, Nashik Road and till today all the applicants are in jail.
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 these applicants.
Charge-sheet is filed and investigation is over.
3.

It is further stated that some of the applicants are students and
some of the applicants are agriculturist and the only Karta of their family and
as applicants are behind bar their family going to starvation. The FIR and
charge-sheet nowhere reveals overt act of applicants. Allegations against the
applicants are without concrete evidence.
4.

The prosecution has filed say and submitted that accused nos.1
to 11 has been seen in CCTV footage alongwith weapon and weapon are
seized from them. I.O. has also seized weapon from applicants no.12 to 16
and 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. Adv.
Deshmukh placed reliance on various citation as follows Page 2 of 6
BAIL APPLN.No.1010/2022
(order below Exh.1)
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Abhijeet Rajendra Sawant Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2017 CLU
896 (Bombay H.C.)
Ramesh Iranna Bali Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2017 DGLS (SC)
1580.
Nadeem Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra, 1010 ALL MR (Cri)
2551.
Vinod Bhavarlal Mohata Vs. State of Maharashtra, LEX
(Bom)2010–3–96.
Yunis & Anr Vs. State of U.P. 1999(2) Crimes 284 (Allahabad
H.C.)
Suresh Krishnarao Pol Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2009 ALL MR
(Cri.) 3289.
Matru @ Girish Chandra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, LEX(SC)
1971-3-46.

With due respect all citations are not applicable to the case in hand.
7.

Adv.Shri.Deshmukh vehemently submitted that there is no
criminal history of accused. They are in jail for more than one month. 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 Ramesh Salve
was murdered and son of first informant sustained grievous injury.
8.

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
Page 3 of 6
BAIL APPLN.No.1010/2022
(order below Exh.1)
and legs on Ramesh Salve. Rahul was caught hold by Sonu Gupta (BSummary Report) and Mayur Mali (applicant of Bail Application
No.974/2022), 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 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.
9.

I have also gone through the statement of injured Francis @
Kavu Patric Manwel dated 29.1.2022 and statement of all witnesses filed
alongwith charge-sheet. Statement as well as report alongwith the chargesheet clearly shows that the FIR reveals only name of applicant no.1,
Gangaram and applicant no.2 Suraj whereas name of the other 14 applicants
are not mentioned in FIR as well as statement of eye-witnesses before police.
The report filed by the SDPO reveals that the applicant no.1 to 11 was seen
in the CCTV footage and there is recovery of weapon at the instance of
applicants by the investigation agency.
10.

After minute perusal of charge-sheet, I am of the considered
opinion that applicants/accused no.3 to 16 played minor role in commission
of offence. There is nothing on record to attribute any overt act against all
the applicants. It is true that the name of the applicants no.1 and 2 is
mentioned in the FIR with a minor role of assault by applicant no.1 on
Page 4 of 6
BAIL APPLN.No.1010/2022
(order below Exh.1)
Bhushan Ahire and applicant no.2 on other witnesses. It nowhere reveals
after perusal of charge-sheet that any of the witnesses is still admitted in the
hospital. The charge-sheet is already filed in the Court. After perusal of the
charge-sheet it reveals minor role played by the applicant/accused when
compare with other co-accused who played main role. The most of the
applicants/accused are young age and student and taking education,
whereas other accused are agriculturist by occupation and family dependent
on them. Therefore, subject to stringent condition they are entitled to release
on bail.
11.

The Ld. Adv. Shri.Deshmukh has placed reliance on Abhijeet
Rajendra Sawant Vs State of Maharashtra, 2017 CLU 896, in which the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court held that,
“Upon perusing the papers of investigation and upon
hearing the learned senior counsel, the applicant who was
hardly 18/19 years old at the time of incident, deserves to
be enlarged on bail. The active role is played only by the
father of the applicant. It cannot be said that the
exhortation has resulted into action and hence the
applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail”.
He
further
relied
upon
Suresh
Krishnarao
Pol
Vs
State
of
Maharashtra, 2009 ALL MR (Cri) 3289, wherein it is held that,
“I have perused the case dairy. The First Information Report
shows that only Namdeo Nandardhane and Purushottam
were named. It appears that thereafter some more
statements were recorded. In so far as the present applicant
is concerned, there is no allegation that the present
applicant hit the deceased by any dangerous weapon.
Allegation is against Purushottam and Namdeo
Nandardhane about the actual assault. In view of this, the
applicant deserves to be released on anticipatory bail”.

Page 5 of 6
BAIL APPLN.No.1010/2022
(order below Exh.1)
12.

Considering the over all submissions by both the parties, perusal
of the charge-sheet, statement of witnesses and CCTV footage I am of the
considered opinion that all applicants/accused are entitled to release on bail
with condition. Hence, following order is passed ORDER
1.

Bail Application below Exh.1 is allowed.

2.

Applicants/accused no.1 to 16 be released on bail in C.R.
No.9/2022 registered with Igatpuri Police Station for an
offence punishable under Sections-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 on furnishing P. R. Bond of
Rs.25,000/- each (Rs.Twenty Five Thousand Only) with
one or two solvent surety of like amount on the
following conditions:
(a) They shall attend Igatpuri Police Station on First and
Third Monday in between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. for
next three months.
(b) They shall not pressurize the informant prosecution
witnesses and their family members and not come in
contact in any way with them and also tamer them.
(c) Applicant/accused shall submit his contact numbers
and proof in respect of permanent and temporary
residence to this Court.
(d) If he breach any of the abovesaid conditions it would
be a cause to cancel the bail.

3.

Criminal Bail Application stands disposed of accordingly.
Digitally signed by
UMESHCHANDRA
UMESHCHANDRA JAIKUMAR MORE
JAIKUMAR MORE
Date: 2022.09.08
11:19:55 +0530
Nashik.
Date : 07.09.2022
(Dr. U.J. More)
Additional Sessions Judge
Nashik.

Page 6 of 6