GORAKH SARJERAO PAWAR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2026:BHC-AUG:2235



                                                  (1)                   927 cri apeal 20.26

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               927 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 20 OF 2026

                            GORAKH SARJERAO PAWAR AND OTHERS
                                          VERSUS
                          THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

                                                …..
                Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Swapnil Jawalkar for J.P.legal Associates
                             APP for Respondents/State : Mr. R.D. Raut
                                                …..

                                            CORAM :      Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.
                                            DATE :       17.01.2026

           P.C.:-

           1.           Heard Mr. Swapnil Jawalkar the learned counsel appearing for

           the appellants and Mr. R.D. Raut the learned APP for the respondent no.1 at

           length. It is not necessary to issue notice to respondent no.2/informant.


           2.           By the present appeal, the appellants prayed for grant of

           anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.699/2025 registered on

           17.07.2025 with MIDC Waluj Police Station for the offence punishable under

           Section 117(2), 118(1), 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 351(2) 352, 324(2), of

           the BNS Act and under Section 4 (25) of the Arms Act and under Section 3

           (2)(r), 3 (1)(s), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled

           Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, after filing of the charge-sheet it is
                                          (2)                     927 cri apeal 20.26

registered as Special Case No.710/2025 pending on the file of the learned

Special Court , SC-ST Act, Aurangabad.


3.          Needless to say that at the earlier point of time, the present

appellants/accused filed Criminal Appeal No.716/2025 and prayed for

anticipatory bail in the said crime, however, on 03.11.2025 the appellants

withdrew the said appeal. The order dated 03.11.2025 reads as under:

           “1.    The learned Advocate for the appellants, at the outset, makes a
           statement that she is having instructions on behalf of the appellants to
           withdraw the instant appeal.

           2.     Permission granted. This criminal appeal is disposed of, as
           withdrawn.”



4.          Since no liberty has been sought and the appellants/accused

withdrew the earlier appeal seeking a similar relief of anticipatory bail and as

no changing circumstances have been brought on record, so also, merely filing

of the charge-sheet against the present appellants does not entitle them to

seek anticipatory bail in connection with the crime which has occurred within

the public view. So also, Section 18 of the SC & ST Act creates a bar to

enlarge the accused on anticipatory bail. In the case of Kiran V/s. Rajkumar J.

Jain; AIR 2025 SC 4083, it has been held that where on the face of record the

offence punishable under Section 3 of the Act is not made out, in that event

the Court may exercise the discretion to grant anticipatory bail.
                                      (3)                  927 cri apeal 20.26

5.          In the case in hand, the FIR itself suggest that the accused

persons abused the informant/respondent no.2 on his caste in public view and

assaulted with deadly weapon like steel rod, plastic rod and also with a

pointed sword. Further, the earlier appeal for anticipatory bail was withdrawn

which amounted to dismissal of the appeal. Therefore, I do not find any

substance in the present appeal and it is dismissed accordingly.



                                                 [Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.]




mubashir