..1..
Cri. Bail Appln. No.549/22
IN THE COURT OF ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE (COURT NO.11)
NASHIK
Criminal Bail Application No.549 of 2022
1.
2.
Nandu Raghunath Raundal
Age 45 yrs., Occ: Agri.
Dadaji Raghunath Raundal
Age 42 Yrs., Occ: Agri.
Both r/o. At Post Bendi,
Tal. Kalwan, Dist. Nashik.
…Applicants
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Inspector,
Kalwan Police Station.
(Cr. No.70/2022)
…Opponent
ORDER ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION.
1.
The applicants/accused have filed this application for grant
of anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in Crime No.70 of
2022 of Kalwan Police Station for the offence punishable under sections
353, 332, 186, 427, 504 and 506 r.w. 34 of I.P.C.
2.
The facts in brief of the case are as under:
On 01/05/2022 at about 11.00 a.m. the informant
received phone of PI Shri. Nagre and he was informed that PHC Borse
and others attached to his police station had been for preparation of
spot panchanama in CR No. 68/2022 registered in their Police station.
When they had been on the spot and the informant in the said case
namely Sanjay Bhamre and others was showing them spot, the present
applicants who were present there abused Sanjay Bhamare and others
and did not allow the police officers to enter on the spot. So as the
..2..
Cri. Bail Appln. No.549/22
situation of law and order arose the police officer had left the said
place, so informant was directed to visit the applicants with police staff
and to convince them and bring them to the police station for enquiry.
So when the informant and other police staff had been to the house of
applicant for enquiry in the said matter, after reaching their the
applicant Nandu Raundal abused the informant PSI Nikam and
threatened him. When the informant was narrating them that they
should go with them for interrogation in connection with the said
crime, applicants refused to go the police station and threatened the
informant and others police staff. Lateron, the applicant Nandu caught
the colour of informant and scuffled with him and he abused him in
filthy language and threatened him. When the other police constable
Borse and Bhoye were trying to specify applicant Nandu Raundal he
threatened informant that he will lodge complaint against them falsely
and also will commit suicide and will levelle false allegations against
them. He also threatened to call media and said that he will see that
informant will loose his job. The applicant Nandu and Dadaji took the
stones and tried to pelt the same on them. Due to the said scuffle and
assault the little finger of left hand of informant was fractured. Hence,
the report as the applicants restrained the informants for performing
their official duty and for assaulting informant.
3.
The applicant by this application have contended that there
was some dispute between them and Sandip Pagar, Jayant Pagar on
account of agricultural land. So they have lodged false complaint
against applicants in Kalwan Police station. However, due to death of
their nephew they could not go to the police station. So police had been
to their house and infront of their relatives they abused the applicants.
One of the police officer caught the collar of applicant no.1 and dragged
him out of their house. So to remove himself from the clutches of the
..3..
Cri. Bail Appln. No.549/22
said police officer applicant no.1 tried and nothing besides the same
took places. But they are falsely implicated by the police in the present
crime. So it is prayed that they be released on anticipatory bail and they
will cooperate in the investigation and will abide the conditions of bail
if any, imposed on them.
4.
Heard Ld. Adv. Mr. K.B. Wagh for the applicants and Ld.
APP. Mrs. Patil for the respondent/State.
5.
Ld. Adv. Mr. Wagh for applicants has argued that, the
applicants are falsely involved in the offence and no incident has taken
place. The informant in the present crime was not the I.O. in CR. No.
68/2022 for investigation of which allegedly they had been to the
applicants. Hence, the presence of the informant on the spot is not
believable. He also argued that the crime i.e. CR No. 68/2022 which is
registered against the present applicants is bailable in nature and so
there was no reason for the present informant to take the applicants to
police station for interrogation. So he argued that, the incident alleged
in the FIR has not taken place. Whereas the police had been on the spot
only pressurize the present applicants. The main dispute is between the
present applicants and Sanjay Bhamre and others relating to
agricultural land G.No.108/2 of Bhendi Shivar. The said land is in
possession of the said applicants and only to forcibly dispossess them
from the same, police were pressurizing them. So false crime is
registered against them and they have not obstructed the informant
while discharging his official duty. Hence, he argued that the applicants
be released on bail and they will cooperate in the investigation. Also
they will not abscond and will also abide the terms and conditions of
the bail if any, imposed on them.
6.
Per contra, the Ld. APP argued that when the PHC Borse
and other officers had been to the spot for preparation of spot
..4..
Cri. Bail Appln. No.549/22
panchnama in connection with CR No. 68/2022, the present applicants
have threatened the informant in the said case and have obstructed the
officers from entering the spot of the said incident which is the
agricultural land. Lateron, in connection with the interrogation of the
said crime the police officer including informant had been to their
house but applicants have scuffled with the informant, threatened him
and others. In the said incident the little finger of the left hand of
informant is fractured. Thereby as the applicants have restrained the
informant from discharging their official duty. So they should not
released on bail. If they are released on bail situation of law and order
will arise. So she argued that application be rejected.
7.
Considering the rival submissions. In view of the
contentions in the present application it can be gathered that, the
applicants are also not disputing the fact that one previous crime No.
68/2022 is registered against them and in connection with the said
crime they were called by the police for interrogation. However, they
have not attended the police station and so police had been to them for
investigation. Moreover, from the contents in the FIR. it can be prima
facie gathered that in connection with the aforestated crime when the
police had been to the spot the applicants have restrained them and
have not allowed to enter into the said land for preparation of spot
panchnama. So from the contents in the FIR and from the the present
application, prima facie the presence of informant and other police staff
alongwith applicants is not disputed.
8.
In view of the contents in the FIR and from the say of I.O. it
can be gathered that, in the said incident the little finger of the left
hand of informant is fractured, but MLC is yet to be received. Moreover,
the say of I.O. also shows that some non cognizable offences are also
registered against the present applicants. Whereas, the offence i.e. CR
..5..
Cri. Bail Appln. No.549/22
No. 68/2022 is also registered against them and thereafter in
connection with the investigation in the said crime when the police had
been to them, they have restrained them. So prima facie there is direct
material on record against the applicants and so their custodial
interrogation is essential. Moreover, considering the nature of the
offence and the previous incidents it can be gathered that prima facie at
this stage presence of applicants is essential with I.O. for interrogation.
Hence, for the aforestated reasons as prima facie the involvement of the
applicant in the offence can be seen and as their custodial interrogation
is essential, I proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail is rejected.
RADHIKA
MADHUKAR
SHINDE
Date:10/05/2022
Nashik.
Digitally signed
by RADHIKA
MADHUKAR
SHINDE
Date:
2022.05.12
11:16:16
+0530
(Smt. R.M. Shinde)
Additional Sessions Judge,
(Court No.11) Nashik.