1 14 ABA 576.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO. 576/2026 (Vikas S/o Pralhad Pawar Vs. The 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. A. S. Dhore, Advocate applicant. Ms. S. N. Thakur, APP for non-applicant/State. CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J . DATED : 18/08/2026. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.142/2026 registered with Police Station Lonar, Tah. Lonar, Dist. Buldhana for the offences punishable under Sections 118(2), 118(1), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. 3. The prosecution case in nutshell is that on 05/04/2026 between 05:30 to 6:00 p.m., a quarrel took place in the field of Nilesh Tejankar between the children of Vikas – applicant, and Subhash. The informant pacified the quarrel and sent them home. After that applicant along with Shubhash came to the house of informant and inquired why the informant slapped their children and on this pretext, the applicant started abusing the informant 2 14 ABA 576.26 and assaulted him with fist and blows. Further, the applicant also assaulted the informant with an iron rod on his right hand wrist, left hand finger, legs and back, due to which, he sustained injuries. Even Subhash Pawar threatened to kill him by using a knife. Based on this information, the first information report was registered. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that while playing, there was a quarrel between the children of applicant and accused No.2 Subhash Pawar, therefore the informant intervened in the quarrel, which was not liked by the applicant and other co-accused who questioned the informant as to why he intervened in the quarrel between their children. Thereafter, the applicant and co-accused went to the house of the informant with an iron rod and assaulted the informant. He submits that this Court considering the nature of allegations has already protected the applicant and accordingly he has abided by the terms and conditions mentioned in that order. Though recovery of iron rod is made at the behest of the applicant, however no assault was made on the vital part of the body. Therefore, the applicant be released on anticipatory bail. 3 14 ABA 576.26 5. On the other hand, the learned APP invited my attention to the injury certificate, wherein it is mentioned that there are two grievous injuries in the nature of fracture on wrist and third finger. Apart from these two grievous injuries, there are three other simple injuries on the chest, right knee and scrotal region. She further submits that there are statements of various eye-witnesses who have named the applicant and the co-accused. The applicant is the main accused who inflicted blow on the injured. Considering the seriousness of the offence, she submits that the applicant though attended the police station that by itself is not sufficient to grant the anticipatory bail. Under such circumstances she submits that the applicant does not deserve to be granted bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions. It is not in dispute that on a petty quarrel, the incident took place. It appears that the applicant went to the house of the informant and with the help of iron rod inflicted blows on the informant who accordingly sustained aforesaid injuries. No doubt, prima facie, it appears that the informant has sustained two grievous injuries in the nature of fracture, however, it appears that those injuries are not on vital 4 14 ABA 576.26 parts of the body. It is necessary to mention at this juncture that this Court has already protected the applicant by granting interim protection and accordingly, the applicant has complied with all the conditions which are mentioned in the order. Considering the nature of allegations and as there are no criminal antecedents against the applicant, I am of considered view that the interim protection granted by this Court needs to be confirmed. Hence, the following order:- ORDER (I) Application is allowed and disposed of. (II) The order dated 07/07/2026 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions as incorporated in the said order. 7. Pending applications, if any, stand 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 Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 18/08/2026 18:34:15