[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Mahendra S/O Ambadas Dhule vs State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso., ... on 23 March, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:4621
1 24-Cr.BA-294-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [B.A.] NO. 294 OF 2026
Mahendra s/o Ambadas Dhule
-- VERSUS --
State of Maharashtra
__________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
Mr. Vivek R. Thote, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. A.G. Mate, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State.
CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
DATE : MARCH 23, 2026.
Heard.
2. The present application is filed seeking
regular bail in Crime No.243/2025 for the offence
punishable under Sections 109, 351(2) and 351(3) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (BNS), registered
with Police Station Phophali, District Yavatmal.
3. As per the First Information Report
dated 14/07/2025, lodged by the informant,
Ambadas Prabhakar Dhule, it is alleged that about 8
to 10 days prior to the incident, the accused had
quarreled with informant's father and had extended
threats to his life, though the dispute was settled. It is
alleged that on 11/07/2025, at about 5:30 p.m.,
when the informant's father went near the village
public water tank with cattle, the applicant assaulted
him by hitting a stone on his head with an intention
2 24-Cr.BA-294-2026
to cause death, resulting in serious injuries. The
injured was shifted to various hospitals and
ultimately taken to Nanded, where he was
undergoing treatment and had slipped into coma. On
the basis of these allegations, the informant has
sought action against the accused for the said assault.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant
submits that there was no intention on the part of the
applicant to cause death of the victim, however, he
submits that he picked a stone lying on the road and
pelted it on the side of the victim, wherein the stone
hit on the head of the victim and caused grievous
injury. He submits that it was only single blow. Even
the papers of investigation does not show the reason
why the applicant has assaulted with the help of
stone. He further submits that abruptly after seeing
the victim when he was proceeding to provide water
to the cattle, the applicant arrived from opposite
direction on a bullock cart and pelted stone, which
hit the victim on the head. Therefore, he submits that
the intention cannot be attributed that he wanted to
kill the applicant, therefore, he submits that
ingredients of Section 109 of BNS is not attracted. He
further submits that there are no antecedents, the
applicant is behind bars since 15/07/2025. The
investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed and till
3 24-Cr.BA-294-2026
today no charges are framed. He also submits that
there is delay in registration of the F.I.R.
5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P.
vehemently opposes the application and submits that
there are serious allegations against the applicant. For
no reason the applicant has pelted stone towards the
victim with an intention to cause death. He further
submits that the injury certificate specifically
discloses that the injury is grievous and he was
shifted from Yavatmal to Nanded. The victim was
required to take treatment for 25 days as an indoor
patient as he had suffered "Subtle linear fracture
right temporal bone". He further submits that the
victim has specifically stated that the applicant,
without any reason, assaulted him by throwing a
stone which hit his head, and, therefore, from this
fact itself, the intention to cause death can be
gathered. He submits that the victim has somehow
survived the incident and, therefore, the applicant
does not deserve to be granted bail.
6. I have considered the rival submissions.
Admittedly, it appears from the record that, the F.I.R.
was registered by the son of the victim, namely,
Ambadas, on 14/07/2025. The incident occurred on
11/07/2025. Admittedly, victim was taken from
Yavatmal to Nanded and, therefore, there is every
possibility that there was delay in registering the
4 24-Cr.BA-294-2026
F.I.R., that by itself, is not fatal when the victim was
taken from one place to another for treatment. It is
further to be noted that the allegations against the
applicant are that while proceeding to provide water
to the cattle the applicant has abruptly pelted stone
on the victim's head which hit the victim on the head
and caused grievous injury. The reason seems to be of
some previous enmity between the applicant and the
father of the informant, i.e., victim. No doubt, the
injury is grievous and the applicant was required to
take treatment for 25 days, so also it had caused
fracture to the head, however, now the fact remains
that the applicant is behind bars since 15/07/2025
and further the investigation is over and charge-sheet
is filed. Even till today no charges are framed. No
purpose would be served by keeping the applicant
behind bars, therefore, I am inclined to grant bail by
imposing stringent conditions. Hence, the following
order:-
ORDER
(i) The Criminal Application is
allowed;
(ii) The applicant/accused
(Mahendra s/o Ambadas Dhule) be released on
regular bail in connection with Crime
No.243/2025 for the offence punishable under
5 24-Cr.BA-294-2026
Sections 109, 351(2) and 351(3) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, (BNS),
registered with Police Station Phophali, District
Yavatmal, on his furnishing a P.R. bond of
Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand Rupees)
with one solvent surety 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 applicant shall not enter into
the village Taroda, Taluka Umarkhed, District
Yavatmal;
(v) The accused shall provide his
residential address and cell number to Police
Station concerned and shall not change his place
of residence without prior intimation to the
Investigating Agency;
(vi) The accused shall attend each and
every date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend
the trial for two consecutive dates, or fails to
comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default
would entail the State to ask for cancellation of
bail or even trial Court can suo moto take
cognizance of this and cancel the bail;
6 24-Cr.BA-294-2026
(vii) Pending Misc. Application(s), if
any, also stand disposed of.
[ M.M. NERLIKAR, J ]
Piyush Mahajan
