1 31 BA 1089.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 1089/2026 (Prashant S/o Ambadas Gohad & anr. 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. R. M. Daga, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. A. Kadukar, APP for non-applicant/State. CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J . DATED : 10/09/2026. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicants are seeking bail in connection with Crime No. 29/2026 registered with Police Station Benoda, Dist. Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 189, 189(4), 190, 181(3), 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the informant is a retired police officer on 09/02/2026 when he went to the police station Benoda, the accused persons formed an unlawful assembly and misbehaved with him and police officers, and assaulted two of his associates, and further abused him, which was caught in the CCTV footage, regarding which he had made complaint to Additional S.P. Amravati. It is alleged that the accused 2 31 BA 1089.26 persons committed this act as he has filed a complaint about damage to his pipe lines in the field by Prafull Gohad and his relatives Ritesh Dhote and one Mahipati Satpute and as it was done again and again so case is also pending in the Court. Due to which, Praful and others would harass him. On 21/02/2026, Praful, Prashant and others went to informant’s field. It is alleged that Prafula and Prashant inflicted blow on his legs with knife and also assaulted with iron rod and stick. Hence, the FIR. 4. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that First Information Report (“FIR”) implicates as many as nine accused persons. He further submits that while filing the charge-sheet, the investigating officer comes to the conclusion that though the applicants shown to have used knife in the assault, however upon concluding the investigation, the conclusion was drawn that no knife was used, however sticks are used. Even if it is considered that the applicants have used sticks, the injuries are not on the vital part of the body. Further, he contended that though in the injury certificate, there are 11 injuries sustained by informant, however out of these injuries, many are simple injuries. Two persons have been falsely implicated by the 3 31 BA 1089.26 informant, against whom a summary report was filed giving them a clean chit. Therefore, the entire case of the prosecution is doubtful and exaggerated. Further, even in the mobile recording of the incident, it shows that applicant No.2 was seen in the mobile recording, however so far as the white colour shirt person is concerned, he has not been identified. Under such circumstances, considering material collected by investigating agency and there are no criminal antecedents against them, the applicants deserve to be granted bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned APP submits that a thorough and impartial investigation has been conducted by the investigating agency. At the end of which the investigating officer has filed a summary report against two persons i.e. Amol Mandpe and Ballya Dhote giving them clean chit. Even though the informant stated about use of knife, however this fact was ruled out by the investigating agency on the basis of the material collected. Further, merely giving clean chit to those persons and use of knife being ruled out, that by itself is not sufficient to grant bail to the applicants, since the applicants are actively involved in crime as they have beaten with the 4 31 BA 1089.26 help of stick to the informant who is 62 years of age. There are fractures on the person of the informant i.e. on the hands and legs and shoulder. Even if there is exaggeration on the part of the informant, that by itself is not sufficient to grant bail to the applicants, since there are total 11 injuries found on the person of the informant. Therefore, considering the role of the applicants and specific role attributed in mobile recording in respect of applicant No.2, both the applicants are not entitled for bail. 6. Upon consideration of the rival submissions and after perusal of the the record, prima facie, it appears that there is dispute between both the parties in respect of landed property. It further appears that the informant has exaggerated the incident and tried to implicate as many as 9 accused persons, however the charge-sheet was filed against 7 persons. No doubt, there may be some exaggeration, but it prima facie appears that the applicants are responsible for the injuries caused to the informant, however it appears that they have given blows on the hands and the legs. Had it been a case, if the applicants were having intention to cause death, they would have assaulted on head. No doubt, there are fractures, but 5 31 BA 1089.26 considering the nature of allegations, conduct of the informant the the fact that the investigation is complete, charge-sheet is filed, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicants. Hence, the following order:- ORDER (i) Criminal application is allowed and disposed of. (ii) The applicant/accused Prashant S/o Ambadas Gohad and Praful S/o. Ambadas Gohad be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 29/2026 registered with Police Station Benoda, Dist. Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 109(1), 189, 189(4), 190, 181(3), 191(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 on their furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- each with two sureties in the like amount. (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 their residential address and cell number to concerned Police Station and shall not change their place of residence without prior intimation to the concerned Investigating Officer. (v) The applicants/accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If they fails to attend the trial on even a single date or fail to comply with the aforesaid 6 31 BA 1089.26 conditions, their 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 Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 11/09/2026 10:44:19