27-ABA-1202-26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1202 OF 2026 1. Sanjay Bajirao Vetal 2. Abhijit Sanjay Vetal ..APPLICANTS VERSUS State of Maharashtra ..RESPONDENT .... Mr. Shaikh M.A. Jahagirdar, Advocate for applicants Ms. P.J. Bharad, A.P.P. for respondent - State .... CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 15th SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT : 1. The applicants seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 205 of 2026 registered with Rahata Police Station, Dist. Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 189(2), 190 and 191(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that there is no allegation against Applicant No.2 – Abhijit Snajay Vetal that he was carrying any weapon or causing hurt to any injured or the informant. The only allegation against Applicant No.2 – Abhijit Sanjay Vetal is that he caught hold of the informant. He further contends that custodial interrogation of applicants is not necessary. According to him, considering the previous 1 / 3 2026:BHC-AUG:42540 27-ABA-1202-26.odt disputes between the parties, possibility of false implication cannot be ruled out. 3. Learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for the informant opposed the grant of any relief to the applicants by referring the allegations against them in the F.I.R. According to them, the allegations in the F.I.R. are supported by the injury certificate on record. As far as recovery of weapon is concerned, custodial interrogation of Applicant No.1 is necessary. 4. Prima facie, perusal of record and contention of learned counsel for Applicant No.2 indicates that there are disputes between the parties and on going through the same, possibility of false implication is not ruled out. There is no allegation against Applicant No.2 that he carried any weapon or caused any assault. As far as Applicant No.2 is concerned, it is not a case where his custodial interrogation is necessary. There is nothing on record to show that this applicant has misused the liberty granted to him. 5. As far as Applicant No.1 is concerned, report lodged by the informant indicates specific allegation of assault with a weapon against Applicant No.1. It is not a case where said allegation is not supported by any material on record. Injury certificate indicates causing grievous injury to the informant. Since weapon is being used in the said incident, for recovery of 2 / 3 27-ABA-1202-26.odt the same custodial interrogation of Applicant No.1 is necessary. As such, application deserves to be dismissed qua Applicant No.1 - Sanjay Bajirao Vetal and same is accordingly dismissed. 6. Anticipatory bail application is allowed to the extent of Applicant No.2 – Abhijit Sanjay Vetal, by confirming the interim relief. ( R.M. JOSHI, J. ) SSD 3 / 3