Bombay High Court
BHUJANG CHATRAPATINATH ZAMBREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- R M JOSHI
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail with conditions and a cost of Rs. 50,000.
Summary
The applicant, Bhujang Chatrapatinath Zambre, filed a fourth anticipatory bail application in connection with a case involving multiple IPC offences (307, 326, 324, 323, 504, 506, 143, 147, 148, 149). Earlier bail applications had been rejected on merit, but the parties now claim to have settled the dispute and have jointly moved to quash the FIRs. The informant/victim did not object and filed an affidavit supporting the settlement, while the State opposed any relief citing the prior rejections. The court noted that the settlement renders the continuation of the proceedings unnecessary and, considering the use of government resources, imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with a personal bond of Rs. 15,000, one surety, and several conditions, including attendance at the police station, non‑contact with witnesses, and cooperation with the investigation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted despite previous rejections when the parties have settled and seek quashment of the FIRs
- Whether the court may impose a monetary cost on the applicant for granting bail
- Whether conditions can be imposed on the bail to safeguard the investigation
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 324, 326, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- settlement
- quashment of FIR
- Indian Penal Code
- pre‑arrest bail
- court costs
- conditions of bail
Judgment
-1-
aba1046.26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
41 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1046 OF 2026
Bhujang Chatrapatinath Zambre ….Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & another …..Respondents
Mr. S. J. Salunke, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. M. K. Goyanka, APP for the State.
Mr. Y. H. Lagad, Advocate for the informant.
CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 27th JULY, 2026.
PER COURT :
1. This is a fourth bail application seeking pre-arrest bail in
connection with Crime No. 0143/2023, registered with Ashti Police
Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections
307, 326, 324, 323, 504,506, 143, 147, 148, 149 of Indian Penal
Code. There is no dispute about the fact that the previous bail
applications were rejected on merit and hence, question of grant of
any relief to the Applicant on merit does not arise.
2. This application however, is filed with the contention that both
the parties involved in the present application have settled the
dispute between themselves and preferring application for quashment
-2-
aba1046.26.odt
of First Information Reports filed by both the sides. Criminal
Application No. 1228/2026 is pending before the appropriate Court.
3. Learned Counsel for Applicant submits that even if the bail is
not to be granted on merit, it cannot be ignored that the parties have
settled the dispute and having jointly sought quashment of the First
Information Report registered against each other. In the light of these
facts, it is his submission that by imposing appropriate conditions,
application can be allowed.
4. Learned Counsel for the informant/victim records no objection
for the same. Infact, affidavit is filed by the informant to that effect.
Learned APP opposed grant of any protection to the Applicant for the
reason that previous three bail applications filed by the Applicant
were rejected by this Court.
5. No doubt, previous bail applications were rejected on merit,
however, order dated 5.03.2024 passed in Anticipatory Bail
Application No. 1731/2023 indicates that the parties were exploring
possibility of settlement and were likely to file proceeding for
-3-
aba1046.26.odt
quashment of the First Information Report and therefore, last of such
bail applications was withdrawn.
6. Now, parties have settled the dispute and filed proceeding for
quashment which are pending before the competent Court. In view of
the fact that the settlement is arrived at between the parties,
needless to say what would be the outcome of the present proceeding,
if it is allowed to be continued. In any case, since the Government
machinery has been used, appropriate cost needs to be imposed for
grant of relief to the Applicant. In the facts of the case, cost is
determined at Rs. 50,000/- to be paid to the High Court Legal
Services Sub-Committee at Aurangabad within a period of a week. In
view of this, application is allowed in following terms :-
ORDER
(i) In the event of arrest of applicant Bhujang
Chatrapatinath Zambre, in connection with Crime No.
0143/2023, registered with Ashti Police Station,
District Beed, for the offences punishable under
Sections 307, 326, 324, 323, 504, 506, 143, 147, 148,
149 of Indian Penal Code, he be released on bail on
furnishing PR Bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen
Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount.
-4-
aba1046.26.odt
(ii) He shall attend the concerned police station as
and when called.
(iii) He shall not contact the witnesses directly or
indirectly.
(iv) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any
manner whatsoever.
(v) He is further directed to cooperate the
investigating agency for further investigation.
(vi) Learned APP to communicate this order to the
concerned Investigating Officer.
( R. M. JOSHI, J.)
dyb
Checking your session…