IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE, PUNE

AT PUNE

Spl. Case – 160/2024

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA .…Complainant

V/s.

VIVEK BHOLENATH NAVGHARE ..Applicant/Accused

HUM’BLE APPLICATION FOR BAIL U/S. 439 OF

CR.P.C AND SECTION 21(4) OF MCOC IN
CONNECTION WITH AN OFFENCE REGISTERED AT
SHIVAJINAGAR POLICE STATION VIDE C.R. NO.
171/2023, OFFENCE U/SEC. 302, 141, 142, 143,
144, 145, 147, 148, 149, 120(B) OF IPC, 4(25),
5(25)(35) OF ARMS ACT, 37(1)(3), R/W135 OF
MAHARASHTRA POLICE ACT, 3(1)(R), 3(2)(VA),
3(2),(V), 6 OF SCHEDULED CASTES AND THE
SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF
ATROCITIES) ACT, 3(1)(I), 3(2), 3(4) OF
MAHARASHTRA CONTROL OF ORGANISED CRIME
ACT, AND 83(2) OF JUVENILE JUSTICE (CARE AND
PROTECTION OF CHILDREN) ACT

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR:­

The present Applicant/Accused above named VIVEK

BHOLENATH NAVGHARE at present languishing at Yerwada

Central Prison most respectfully begs to state as under: ­

1
1. The Applicant/Accused above named was arrested on

17/08/2023 in connection with an offence registered at

Shivaji Nagar police Station vide C.R. No. 171/2023.

Thereafter accused was produced before Ld. J.M.F.C.

The present applicant was remanded to police and

magisterial custody from time to time and at present he

is in magisterial custody at the Yerwada Central Prison,

Pune.

2. That the prosecution story in nutshell is as under­

 Satish Anand Wankhade (the first informant) resides in

Pune. The complainant has many friends in his locality,

and Nitin Mohan Mhaske was a very close friend of the

complainant. Nitin Mhaske used to be at his residence

after receiving bail by an order dated 30/05/2023 in CR

No. 129/2023 of Koregaon Police Station u/s 307. The

complainant, being in the area, was aware that there

existed a gang of Nitin and another gang of the accused,

leading to frequent quarrels between them. Many

complaints were recorded in the Koregaon Police Station

and other police stations due to these conflicts.

2
 That on 15/08/2023, after returning home from work,

the complainant received a call from Nitin Mhaske

informing him that they would go to Mangla Talkies at

10 pm to watch the movie Gadar 2. He further

mentioned that he had booked four tickets for two other

friends, the complainant, and himself, and they would

all travel together by vehicle to the movie.

 That on 15/08/2023, around 8:30 pm, Nitin Mhaske,

the complainant, and two other friends met at Lokseva

Tarun Mandal. After chatting for a while, they left for

Mangla Talkies at 9:20 pm on their two mopeds, arriving

at 9:45 pm. Another friend of Nitin Mhaske, who worked

at Mangla Talkies, had booked their movie tickets for

the 10 pm show.

 After watching the movie, they all exited. The

complainant went to the parking area and retrieved his

bike, on which Nitin Mhaske sat. As they were taking a

U­turn near the exit gate, around 12­13 people

approached and began assaulting them. The

complainant recognized some of the assailants as they

3
 were from the same locality. The assailants were armed

with swords, sickles, iron rods, and wooden sticks.

 It is alleged that they kicked their bike, causing the

informant and his friend Nitin Mhaske to fall.

Furthermore, the co­accused assaulted Nitin Mhaske on

his head and neck with weapons and pieces of tiles. A

friend of the informant arrived at the scene, and

someone called the police control room. It is alleged that

Nitin Mhaske succumbed to his injuries during the

incident. Subsequently, the informant filed an FIR

against the accused persons.

 During the investigation, the concerned police recorded

a supplementary statement from the informant on

16.08.2023, in which he revised his account and added

names of other co­accused.

 Additionally, during the investigation, the concerned

police recovered CCTV footage from the incident location

and seized weapons from the co­accused.

 Based on the informant's report, FIR No.171 of 2023

was registered for offences punishable under sections

302, 324, 201, 120(B), 143, 147, 148, and 149 of the

4
 IPC & under sections 3(25) and 4(25) of the Arms Act.

The investigation commenced thereafter.

 During the investigation, Shivaji Nagar Police recorded

statements from witnesses and arrested the accused

persons. Further investigation revealed that accused

No.1, Sagar @ Yallya Irappa Kolanatti, is a habitual

offender, and the co­accused committed this offence at

his behest. Therefore, the Investigating Officer proposed

to the Additional Commissioner of Police to apply

provisions under sections 3(1)(i), 3(2), and 3(4) of the

M.C.O.C Act and under sections 3(1)(r), 3(2)(Va), 3(2)(v),

and 6 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Accordingly, the

said authority granted sanction for the application of

provisions of the M.C.O.C Act on 29.08.2023.

 Following this sanction, further investigation was

conducted by the Assistant Commissioner of Police.

3. That, the Accused is in judicial custody and he has not

filed any other application seeking his release on bail.

There is no other application pending before any other

5
 court of the present Accused regarding the present subject

matter.

4. That Applicant has not committed any offence but he has

been implicated by the Complainant with ulterior motive

and hence the Applicant approaching this Hon'ble court

for release him on bail on the following amongst other

grounds thereto:­

GROUNDS

A) That the applicant has not committed any offence much

less than the offence alleged to have been committed by

him.

B) That the name of the present Applicant/Accused is not

appearing in the FIR and he has been falsely implicated

in the present case for ulterior motives.

C) That at the time of the alleged incident, the applicant

was at his residence situated approximately 10

kilometers from the location of the alleged incident. The

CCTV footage from the housing society where the

applicant resides was made available to the

Investigating Officer by wife and mother of Applicant,

6
 supported by an affidavit filed at the Hon’ble Special

Court (under SC and ST Act) during the remand

proceedings.

D) That further, the applicant filed an application under

Section 91 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and

Section 156(3) of CrPC, seeking directions from this

Hon’ble Court to instruct the Investigating Officer (IO) to

seize and collect the said CCTV footage and the DVR

from the residential housing society. However, the

Investigating Officer deliberately disregarded and

neglected the court's order, implicating the present

accused in the case and detaining him behind bars.

E) That the Accused has been arrested in the present

matter only on the basis of skepticism and there is

absolutely no material on record showing the complicity

of the applicant in the present crime.

F) That after going through the Police Reports it is revealed

that no specific overt act has been attributed to the

Accused and the allegations whatever have been made

are absolutely vague and ambiguous.

7
G) That there is absolutely no credible evidence or other

cogent material on record which can substantiate any

possible nexus of the present Accused with the alleged

Crime.

H) That the recovery and/or discovery from the present

Accused is completed and nothing further is to be

recovered and/or discovered at the instance of the

present applicant.

I) That now the investigation of above alleged offence has

been completed as the Charge sheet has been filed

therefore keeping the present Accused behind bar is

absolutely unwarranted.

J) That the present applicant has been implicated in the

said crime only because the car used in this crime was

owned by him.

K) That the prima facie the evidence is not sufficient

indicating involvement of the Applicant in the

occurrence.

L) That there are no any criminal antecedents against the

Applicant / Accused and if he will be remained in the

8
 company of hardened criminal, his career would be

spoiled.

M) That there are 24 accused persons. Statement of the

witnesses runs to several hundred pages and

documents on which reliance is placed by the

prosecution, is voluminous. That it may take

considerable time to start and complete the trial. And

that it wont be in the interest of justice that accused

been kept in jail for an indefinite period.

N) That the Accused is ready and willing to abide by any

terms and conditions imposed on him by this Hon’ble

court.

O) That the Accused is ready and willing to furnish surety

to the satisfaction of this Hon’ble Court.

P) That the Accused undertakes that he will not tamper

with the prosecution witnesses and he will not abuse

the process of law in any manner.

Q) That the Accused is a law­abiding citizen having roots

in society and is permanent resident of address

available on record and as such there is no chance of

the Accused absconding.

9
 R) That this is the only Application filed by the Accused

and no other application is pending before any other

court seeking similar reliefs.

THAT ON THE BASIS OF BROAD PROBABILITIES OF

THE CASE, TOTAL EFFECT OF EVIDENCE AND
DOCUMENTS PRODUCED IN THIS HON'BLE COURT
ALONG WITH THE GROUNDS MENTIONED ABOVE AS
WELL AS THE GROUNDS WHATSOEVER THAT WILL BE
PUT FORTH AT THE STAGE OF FINAL ARGUMENTS, IT
IS MOST HUMBLY PRAYED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE
COURT THE APPLICANT NEEDS KINDLY BE RELEASED
ON BAIL.

IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT –

a. Application may kindly and graciously be allowed.

b. Applicant may kindly be released on bail on such terms

as Hon’ble Court deems to be fit owing to the wide

discretionary powers vested with this Hon’ble Court.

c. Any other order in the interest of justice be kindly be

passed.

PUNE

DATE – 20.04.2024 ADVOCATE FOR APPLICANT

10