Bail Application No.1002/2024.

MHCC020062892024

IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE MUMBAI,

AT GR. MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1002 OF 2024.
IN
C.R. NO. 176 OF 2024.

Yogiraj Mangesh Gaikwad …Applicant.

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra,

(At the instance of Antop Hill Police Station,
Vide C.R.No.176/2024). …Respondent.

Appearances :-
Ld. Adv. Mr. Digambar Sapate for the Applicant/accused.
Ld. APP. Mr. Abhijeet Gondwal for the State/Respondent.

CORAM : H.H. THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE

DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR (C.R.NO.37)

DATED : 23RD APRIL, 2024.

ORAL ORDER
By this application the applicant Yogiraj Mangesh Gaikwad
being accused in C.R.No.176/2024 registered with Antop Hill Police
Station for the offences punishable under Sections 326, 323, 504,
506(2) read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, (hereinafter referred
to as, “IPC”) alongwith Sections 4 and 24 of the Indian Arms Act and
Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, seeks bail under Section
439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short, “CrPC”).

Page 1 of 5
 Bail Application No.1002/2024.

THE CASE OF PROSECUTION IN SHORT ENSUES AS UNDER;

2. It is the case of the prosecution that, as on 02.04.2024, at
about 7.30 hours, while the informant was proceeding with a bucket
of water for attending natures call, applicant/accused pulled the said
small bucket carried by the informant. Informant stated that, he
requires to go for attending natures call and therefore, urged for
returning back the bucket with water, upon which the
applicant/accused alongwith the co-accused started hurling abuses to
the informant and thereafter, started assaulting him with kicks and
blows, at that time accused Nikhil came at the spot with an iron
sword and the applicant/accused took the iron sword and assaulted
the informant on his head and caused him severe injury. Upon
hearing the chaos, the informant’s parents rushed at the spot to
rescue him and the co-accused also assaulted the informant’s parents
with kicks and blows. It was severely bleeding and thus the
informant was hospitalized. Thereafter, offence was registered under
Sections ibid.

3. Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused states that, the

applicant/accused is falsely implicated and has no specific role being
attributed in the FIR. It is stated that, the injury stated are not
grievous or fatal in nature. It is further stated that, even the weapon
stated on one hand is iron sword and medical document states for
Koyta. Thus, considering the same, as there being no eye witness to
the incident, further incarceration is not necessitated. Hence, the Ld.
Advocate for applicant/accused prayed for enlarging the
applicant/accused on bail.

Page 2 of 5
 Bail Application No.1002/2024.

4. Per contra the Ld. Prosecutor has filed their reply vide
Exh.2 and inter alia have resisted the application on various grounds.
It is categorically stated that, the applicant/accused has not denied
for his presence at the spot. It is pertinent that, the
applicant/accused has categorically stated for the technical aspect
which at this juncture will require no consideration. Furthermore, on
perusal of the injury report it palpably evinces that, the injuries
sustained are grievous in nature. Considering the nature of injuries,
the gravity of offence can be well assumed. So also, the area of
assault chosen by the applicant/accused also speaks in quantum. Ld.
Prosecutor further apprehends for abscondance, tampering of
evidence and threatening to prosecution witnesses. Hence, the Ld.
Prosecutor prayed for rejection of application.

5. Heard Ld. Advocate for applicant and Ld. APP for the State.
Perused the application and reply.

6. On meticulous examination of case record, it palpably

evinces to myself that, the applicant/accused has not denied for his
presence at the spot, the acquaintance with the co-accused and the
occurrence of the incident. Injury report shown by the Ld. Prosecutor
speaks in quantum wherein there are three grievous injuries at the
vitals. Therefore, the area chosen for such assault propels for factum
of intention of the applicant/accused. Undoubtedly, the said aspect
can naturally be tested during the course of trial.

7. Moreover, while deciding an application for bail it is settled

that the Court is required to see whether the prima-facie case exists

Page 3 of 5
 Bail Application No.1002/2024.

or not. It is not necessary to make roving enquiry or examining the

merits of prosecution case.

8. Considering the fulcrum of arguments advanced by the Ld.

Advocate for applicant it is palpably clear that, the applicant/accused
has a clear cut involvement in the commission of crime in prima-
facie. Undoubtedly, the co-accused are enlarged on bail, but it is
pertinent that, they are minors. Therefore, there won’t be any parity
applicable to the case of applicant/accused. Injury is grievous in
nature and either party reside in the same locality. Therefore, such
occurrence of incident again cannot be negated. So also,
investigation is at nascent stage and granting such relief will
naturally derail the momentum of investigation. Also, that there is
every possibility that, the applicant/accused might tamper with the
evidence. Therefore, I do not find this as a fit case for grant of bail.
In the backdrop of aforesaid facts, I hold that, the application
deserves no consideration. Hence, order infra :-
ORDER
Bail Application No.1002/2024 stands rejected and
disposed of accordingly.

Digitally signed by
DR. ABHAY DR. ABHAY
AVINASH AVINASH JOGLEKAR
Date: 2024.04.25
JOGLEKAR 17:05:48 +0530

(Dr. A. A. JOGLEKAR)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Date : 23.04.2024. Gr. Bombay (C.R.No.37)

Dictated on : 23.04.2024.
Transcribed on : 24.04.2024.
HHJ signed on : 25.04.2024.

Page 4 of 5
 Bail Application No.1002/2024.

“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL

SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”

Upload Date Upload Time Name of Stenographer

Mahendrasing D. Patil
25.04.2024 05.05 p.m.
Stenographer (Grade-I)

Name of the Judge (With Court HHJ Dr. A. A. JOGLEKAR

Room No.) (Court Room No. 37)
Date of Pronouncement of
23.04.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
25.04.2024
P.O. on
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded
25.04.2024
on

Page 5 of 5