Order 080926aba760.26 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [ABA] NO. 760 OF 2026. Pratik Basantlal Rahangdale -VERSUS- 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 N.R. Tekade, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms S.S. Dhote, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 08, 2026. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.386/2026 registered with Gangazari Police Station, District Gondia for the offences punishable under Sections 109[1], 352 and 3[5] of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). This Court has already protected the applicant by an interim order passed on 25.08.2026. 3. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that no role has been assigned to the applicant, except for his presence and hurling abuses, and this Court has considered said Rgd. Order 080926aba760.26 2 aspect while granting interim protection to him. It is further submitted that after granting interim protection, the applicant has cooperated with the investigating officer. It is submitted that the quarrel took place between the family members of the applicant and informant, and in that quarrel younger brother of the present applicant has given a blow with the help of cement block to the injured. The role ascribed to the applicant is only that he was present on the spot, and that by itself would not attract Section 109 of the BNS, he therefore, prayed for confirming the anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 25.08.2026. 4. On the other hand the learned A.P.P. by contending that with a common intention the applicant and his brother came out of the house and started quarreling and abused the informant’s family. Brother of the applicant has given a blow, and at that time the applicant was present on the spot, hence, in such circumstances, the applicant had shared the common intention. The injuries sustained are grievous one caused on the head, therefore, the applicant does not deserve to be granted anticipatory bail. 5. I have considered the submissions canvassed by the Rgd. Order 080926aba760.26 3 learned Counsel for the parties. Perusal of the first information report reveals that the applicant has not played any vital role in the entire episode. Infact he was present along with the main accused Parag and hurled abuses. Apart from that, there is no role of inflicting blow with the help of cement block on the injured. Thus, considering the role of the applicant, and as this Court has already protected the applicant by order dated 25.08.2026, I am of the considered opinion that the applicant has made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the ad-interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant Pratik Basantlal Rahangdale vide order dated 25.08.2026, is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions are as incorporated in the said order. 6. Criminal Application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Rgd. Signed by: R.G. Dhuriya (RGD) Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 08/09/2026 18:20:35