Order 061026aba826.26.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [ABA] NO. 826 OF 2026. Himanshu Ramesh Kuthe -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra CRIMINAL APPLICATION [ABA] NO. 827 OF 2026. Raju Sampatrao Kuthe -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shri A.A. Naik, Senior Advocate with Shri A.S. Manohar, Advocate for Applicants. Shri N.B. Jawade, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant /State. Shri A.M. Chandekar, Advocate Assisting Prosecution. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : OCTOBER 06, 2026. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Since both these applications arise out of one and same Crime, they are being decided by this common order. 3. Applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.476/2026 registered with Ram Nagar Police Station, Gondia for the offences punishable under Sections 115[2], 118[2], 189[2], 189[4], 190, 191[1], 191[2], Rgd. 2026:BHC-NAG:13489 Order 061026aba826.26.odt 2 191[3], 324[5] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2025 (BNS). 4. The allegations against applicants in the first information report are that – on 21.08.2026 at Laxminagar, Gondia one of the Hon’ble Minister of the State was visiting for attending a program, and therefore on 20.08.2026 on the issue of placing a flex banner, a scuffle took place between two fractions of the same political party. On a call made by one Ashu, that he was being assaulted by accused persons, the informant visited the spot, where he was also assaulted by accused persons including applicants. Applicant - Himanshu assaulted him on head by fighter and Applicant - Raju assaulted by knife on his nose. One of the accused also caused damage to his phone, therefore, the report. 5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for applicants submits that the allegations are made out of political rivalry. Infact the applicants were not present on the spot. Both applicants are cousin brothers. Applicant Himanshu is brother of one Rupesh, who is District Head of the Political Party, and a quarrel between two fractions of the same group arose on account of installing flex banner, as one Minister was to attend the said program. It is alleged in the first information report that Rgd. Order 061026aba826.26.odt 3 the incident took place at 10.30 p.m. on 20.08.2026. The allegations against the applicant Himanshu is that he assaulted the informant by fighter on his head and the applicant Raju has assaulted the informant with knife on his nose. It is further alleged that even other accused persons have brutally assaulted the informant, as well as Taranjeet @ Ashu Makkad. The learned Senior Counsel further submits that in view of the information received under Right to Information Act, the applicant Himanshu was seen driving a vehicle along with Raju on 20.08.2026 at about 23.06 hours, which could be gathered from the location of the said vehicle, that it was proceeding towards the spot of incident at about 23.00 hours, therefore, according to him, if they were already on the spot, there is no question of proceeding towards the spot of incident, as the incident is alleged to have been taken place at 10.30 p.m. Merely due to political rivalry with Rupesh, both applicants have been falsely implicated in the crime as they are his brothers. Hence, they be granted anticipatory bail. 6. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. and the learned Counsel assisting prosecution vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail by inviting my attention to Rgd. Order 061026aba826.26.odt 4 the contents of the first information report. According to them the allegations are serious in nature. Applicant Raju has assaulted the informant with the help of knife and the applicant Himanshu has used fighter for assaulting the informant on head. Further they have also assaulted one Taranjeet @ Ashu. My attention is invited towards the injury certificate in order to demonstrate the seriousness of the crime, and according to them now Section 109 of the BNS has also been added, therefore, considering the fact that the injuries are on the vital part of the body and were inflicted by using deadly weapons it would amount to attempt to murder. In these circumstances, it is their submission that considering the seriousness of the crime, applicants do not deserve to be granted anticipatory bail. 7. Upon consideration of the aforesaid submissions and on perusal of the case diary, as well as the first information report, it appears that the incident occurred on 20.08.2026, due to difference of opinion between two fractions of the same party. The incident occurred on account of installation of flex banner in Gondia City. Perusal of the first information report reveal names of both applicants. It also appears that so far as the allegations against applicants are concerned, it is alleged that Rgd. Order 061026aba826.26.odt 5 Raju has given blow on the nose of the informant with the help of knife, whereas Himanshu has given blow with the help of fighter on his head. It further appears that they have also assaulted Taranjeet @ Ashu. Perusal of the injury certificates reveal that following injuries were caused to the informant and Taranjeet Makkad: Injuries caused to the Informant. 1. Contusion with swelling deformity, reddish in colour on back outer and inner aspect of right - 25 x 20 cm. 2. Contusion with swelling, reddish in colour on left forearm front - 25 x 20 cm. 3. Contusion with swelling deformity, reddish in colour on left hand general - 15 x 12 cm. 4. Surgically sutured wound with black intact sutures on forehead on the right side, 5 cm above the outer canthus right eye – 4x 1.5 cm x black sutures. 5. Surgically sutured wound with black intact sutures vertically placed over the bridge of the nose 1 cm below the root of nose – 3 x 0.5 cm x black sutures. 6. Surgically sutured wound with black intact sutures on back side of head, left side 4 cm above and 4 cm away from EOP – 5 x 1.5 cm x black sutures. 7. Surgically sutured wound with black intact sutures on right wall of nose 1 cm away from the nose injury– 3 x 0.5 cm x black sutures. 8. Periorbital Swelling with contusion, reddish in colour on right eye – 8 x 7 cm. 9. Periorbital swelling with contusion, reddish in colour on left eye – 6 x 5 cm. 10. Comminuted and displaced bilateral nasal bone fractures. Minimally displaced fracture of the anterior wall of the right maxillary sinus with associated bilateral maxillary hemosinus. Rgd. Order 061026aba826.26.odt 6 Injuries caused to the Taranjeet Makkad. 1. Contusion reddish in colour on outer aspect of right thigh- 25 x 20 cm. 2. Contusion reddish in colour on outer aspect of neck on left side - 12 x 10 cm. 3. Contusion reddish in colour on outer aspect of neck on right side – 20 x 15 cm. 4. Acute undisplaced fracture of right transverse process of C7. There are specific allegations of use of deadly weapon by both the applicants i.e. fighter and knife. So far as the submissions in respect of plea of alibi is concerned, at this stage said plea cannot be considered, since there is no cogent material to support the said plea. On the contrary, both the informant, as well as the other injured have specifically marked the presence and overt act of both applicants. Thus considering the nature of allegations, and injuries sustained, I am of the considered view that the applicants have not made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. Criminal Applications are therefore, rejected. JUDGE Rgd. Signed by: R.G. Dhuriya (RGD) Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 08/10/2026 18:44:01