1 328.25ABA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 908 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 328 OF 2025 SAIPRASAD ALIAS SAINATH PANDURANG KHANDRE VERSUS THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE & ANOTHER ... Advocate for Applicant : Mr.Yogesh C. Patil h/f. Mr.V.S.Dhotare APP for Respondent-State : Mr.S.P.Sonpawale … CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 28.02.2025 P.C. : 1] Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State. 2] The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 0037/2025, registered with Umri Police Station, District Nanded, for the offence punishable under Sections 308 (7), 326 (1), 351 (2), 351 (3) r/w. 3 (5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3] It is alleged in the FIR that the applicant along with co-accused had demanded extortion money [Hapta] on 4-5 occasions from the informant for the business 2025:BHC-AUG:5927 2 328.25ABA conducting by the informant in the market area. It is stated that on 28.01.2025 at about 10.00 a.m. when the informant and his father as usual opened their shop i.e. Gurukrupa Trading Company and they bought cotton, soyabeans and tur in the shop. The labourers were loading the cotton in the Eicher Vehicle, at that time, at about 8.00 p.m. when the informant was present near counter of his trading shop, accused Atul Kailash Achkulwar and Sai Pandurang Khandre came there and they demanded extortion money [Hapta] from the informant and the informant denied the same. The applicant-accused thereafter abused and assaulted the informant. Thereafter, the co-accused by threatening to the informant burnt the cotton in the truck and the entire 100 quintal cotton was burnt down. The labourers and people present there in the truck jumped down to save their lives and the labourers and people gathered, thereafter, put off the fire. As such, the FIR is registered against the applicant and co-accused. 4] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the main accused has been arrested and released on bail by the Sessions Court. Custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. 5] Considering the gravity of the offence and role of the applicant cannot be separated from the co-accused at this stage. Prima facie, the applicant is involved in the 3 328.25ABA alleged crime. As such, this is not a case to grant anticipatory bail. Hence, the present application is dismissed. 6] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present anticipatory bail application and the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of this Court while deciding regular bail or at trial. [ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE DDC