PRATIK Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. V. C. Patil Ashtekar for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. P. V. Diggikar for respondent-State.

(2.) The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.81 of 2019, registered with Sindkhed Police Station Tq. Mahur Dist,. Nanded, for the offences punishable under Section 353, 341, 332, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

(3.) It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that, the applicant has been falsely implicated, the investigation is complete and only charge-sheet remains to be filed. Though the two bail applications filed earlier for anticipatory bail by the applicant before the learned Additional Sessions Judge came to be rejected and the third one rejected on 24-01-2020, the contents of the First Information Report would show that the physical custody of the applicant is absolutely not required. There is no question of any recovery or discovery taking into consideration the nature of the offence alleged against the applicant. The First Information Report in fact was lodged against unknown person. The applicant was travelling to Mumbai for hospitalization of father of his friend as the patient was suffering from severe Gangrene to the left leg. The applicant was driving the car. The bus driver was in fact driving his bus rashly and negligently. He put his bus into a ditch thereby throwing the water accumulated in the ditch on the car. The mud came inside the car and thereby damaging the clothes of the passengers. The applicant was only asking the driver of the S.T.Bus about his such behaviour. The incident has been blown out of proportion by the informant.