1 29 BA 909.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 909/2026 (Suvek S/o Nanaji Deotale Vs. State of Maharashtra) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. S. V. Sirpurkar a/w. Mr. A. G. Hunge, Advocates for applicant. Ms. T.H. Udeshi, APP for non-applicant/State. Ms. M. Muley, Mr. N. Safar, Mr. G. Bissa, Advocate assisting to the prosecution CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J . DATED : 11/08/2026. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicant is seeking bail in connection with Crime No.436/2025 registered with Police Station Hingna, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 109(1), 118(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Sections Sections 5, 25, 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The prosecution case in brief is that the applicant and informant are relatives and residing in the same locality. There was a dispute regarding car parking which led to a verbal altercation on 24/02/2025 which was converted into physical assault. During the course of assault, the accused Nana Deotale brought a gun and fired two shots in which Praveen Deotale and Vijay Manawar 2 29 BA 909.26 got injured. Even the informant was assaulted by spade by Suvek Deotale i.e. applicant. The injured persons were taken to the hospital and accordingly the first information report was registered. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that there was on old dispute in respect of right of way. between the family members of applicant and accused persons. Both the families are in close relations. He submits that so far as the incident is concerned, it occurred on 24/12/2025 in the morning, where it is alleged that the father of the applicant fired on Vijay and Praveen, who are brothers of the informant, wherein Vijay died and Praveen was seriously injured. So far as the present applicant is concerned, he has played a limited role of inflicting a blow with the help of spade on the head of the informant. From the allegations in the first information report, it cannot be said that the offence was committed in furtherance of common intention. Considering the role of the applicant and the nature of allegations and the fact that the applicant is behind bars since 29/03/2026, now the investigation is complete, charge-sheet is filed and no purpose would be served by 3 29 BA 909.26 keeping the applicant behind bars, it was prayed to release the applicant on bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned APP and the learned counsel for the informant vehemently oppose the application and submits that the incident is serious in nature. The father of the applicant i.e. Nana Deotale fired two bullets on the person of Vijay and Praveen. Both sustained serious injuries and accordingly Vijay succumbed to those injuries. They further submit that the applicant is the person who has further escalated the quarrel as he abused the family members of the informant in filthy language after the initial.. quarrel was over. The common intention can be gathered from the fact that after the applicant started giving abuses thereafter the father of the applicant got a gun from the house and fired two shots towards Vijay and Praveen. Vijay succumbed to injuries, however Praveen survived, but he sustained serious injuries. They further submit that even the applicant actively participated in the entire episode by inflicting blow with the help of spade on informant’s head which caused injury on his parietal occipital region. Though the injury is simple in nature, however the fact remains that the blow 4 29 BA 909.26 was given with the help of spade on the vital part of the body. Pursuant to the common intention, the entire episode has occurred and therefore no independent role can be carved out and there are eye-witnesses to the incident. There is more than sufficient material against the applicant and under such circumstances they submit that the applicant does not deserve to be granted bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions. It appears from the first information report and the material placed before me that a petty dispute arose between the families of informant and accused persons who are close relatives. The dispute was in respect of right of way and on the day of incident, a quarrel took place over parking of the car in front of the house of accused persons. Initially, the quarrel was pacified, however when the quarrel was over again the present applicant went outside and started abusing informant’s family members, thereafter his father Nana Deotale came with a gun and he fired towards Vijay and Praveen. Both Vijay and Praveen sustained bullet injuries which could be gathered from their postmortem report and the injury certificate respectively. However, so far as the role of the present applicant is concerned he has hurled 5 29 BA 909.26 abuses and inflicted blow with the help of spade on the head of the informant. I have considered the role and the injury certificate which shows that the informant has sustained the injury to his right parietal occipital region which is in simple nature and was inflicted by hard and blunt object. Under such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the role played by the applicant is different than of Nana Deotale who is the main assailant who fired on the deceased Vijay and injured Praveen. Under such circumstances since the applicant is behind bars from 29/03/2026, now the investigation is over, charge-sheet is filed and it is further to be noted that there are no criminal antecedents against the applicant, I am inclined to grant bail, hence the following order:- ORDER (i) Criminal application is allowed and disposed of. (ii) The applicant/accused Suvek S/o Nanaji Deotale be released on bail in connection with Crime No.436/2025 registered with Police Station Hingna, Nagpur for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 109(1), 118(2), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Sections Sections 5, 25, 27 of the Arms Act. on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount. 6 29 BA 909.26 (iii) The accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the evidence. (iv) The accused shall provide his residential address and cell number to the concerned Police Station and shall not change his place of residence without prior intimation to the concerned Investigating Officer.. (v) The applicant shall not enter into the village Gumgaon, Tah. Hingna, Dist. Nagpur. (vi) The applicant/accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial for two consecutive dates or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail. 7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. 8. The observations of this Court are prima facie in nature and are only limited to this application. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by the aforesaid observations. ( M. M. NERLIKAR , J.) Gohane