Bombay High Court

DNYANESHWAR BHUJANG AVHADversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, finding insufficient grounds for arrest and a risk of false implication.

Summary

The applicant, Dnyaneshwar Bhujang Avhad, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a police case alleging assault with an iron rod and several offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The FIR described an incident on 25 June 2026 where the applicant and co‑accused allegedly assaulted the informant, but there were conflicting reports and another accused sustained serious injuries, suggesting a possible group fight. The applicant’s counsel highlighted the lack of a criminal record and the existence of a counter‑report, arguing that custodial interrogation was unnecessary. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the specific allegation of assault and the unrecovered iron rod, supported by an injury certificate. The court, noting the contradictory evidence and the possibility of false implication, granted anticipatory bail on a personal bond with conditions for police cooperation and non‑interference with witnesses.

Issues considered

Whether the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail despite allegations of assault under Sections 109, 115, 118, 351, and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Whether the evidence on record sufficiently justifies arrest or warrants protection of liberty

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 351(3), 352 r/w 3(5)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
assault
false implication
liberty
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
police investigation
personal bond

Judgment

                                  -1-
                                                       aba1531.26.odt

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

     22 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1531 OF 2026

Dnyaneshwar Bhujang Avhad                        ….Applicant

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & another               …..Respondents

Mr. Mr. R. G. Narwade, Advocate holding for Mr. S. E. Shekade,
Advocate for Applicant.
Ms. P. J. Bharad, APP for the State.
Mr. D. R. Markad, Advocate for the informant.


                              CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
                              DATE : 21st SEPTEMBER, 2026.
PER COURT :


1.   Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.

0544/2026,    registered   with   Shevgaon   Police   Station,   District

Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1),

115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 351(3), 352 r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya

Sanhita.



2.   First Information Report indicates that on 25.06.2026 at about

3.30 pm, an incident had occurred in which the informant was

assaulted by the Applicant and co-accused.        There is allegation
                                   -2-
                                                       aba1531.26.odt

against the present Applicant of causing assault on the informant on

his head with iron rod.



3.    Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that here in this

case, there are counter reports in respect of the same incident and

the possibility of causing injury to the informant in the fight between

two groups is not ruled out.    To support this contention, he drew

attention of the Court to the injury certificate of one of the accused

persons Sheshrao indicating causing of two fracture injuries to him.

He claims that Applicant has no criminal history behind him. It is

his submission that having regard to the said fact, custodial

interrogation of the present Applicant is not necessary.



4.    Learned APP and learned Counsel for the informant opposed

grant of any protection to the Applicant on the ground that there are

specific allegations against the Applicant of causing assault with iron

rod. Learned APP, on instructions, makes a statement that the iron

rod used in the assault is yet to be recovered. According to them,

there is injury certificate to support the allegations with regard to

assault caused to the informant.
                                   -3-
                                                           aba1531.26.odt

5.    Prima facie perusal of the record indicates that in respect of the

same incident two different reports came to be lodged. One of the

accused has sustained two fracture injuries.            This supports the

contention of learned Counsel for the Applicant that this could be a

case of fight between two groups.        Insofar as present Applicant is

concerned,    grievous   injury   caused    to   the    informant   is   not

attributable to him. Having regard to the aforestated facts and also

considering the possibility of false/over implication, this Court finds

it to be a fit case to protect the liberty of the Applicant.        For the

purpose of further investigation, if any, the Applicant is directed to

appear before the Investigating Officer on 28.09.2026 and 01.10.2026

between 11.00 am to 1.00 pm. For the purpose of recovery, if any, he

be treated in the custody of police. Hence, the following order :-

                                  ORDER



        (i)    In the event of arrest of applicant Dnyaneshwar
        Bhujang    Avhad,    in   connection     with    Crime   No.
        0544/2026, registered with Shevgaon Police Station,
        District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under
        Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 351(2), 351(3), 352 r/w
        3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 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-
                                                         aba1531.26.odt



      (ii)    He shall attend the concerned police station on
      28.09.2026 and 01.10.2026 between 11.00 am to 1.00
      pm.


      (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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…