Ajay Ananda Wadve vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr.

Heard. Admit. Heard finally with consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

By the present appeal filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the appellant/accused takes exception to order dated 06/12/2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Pusad, in Criminal Bail Application No. 481 of 2025 and thereby declined to release the appellant/accused on bail in connection with Crime No. 292/2025 registered with Police Station, Pusad, District Yavatmal, for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 109(1), 115(2), 351(3), 352, 3(5), of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(v-a) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989.

Having regard to the submissions canvassed on behalf of both sides, I have gone through the record. It is a matter of record that the Crime No. 292 of 2025 was registered with Pusad City Police Station for the above offences on the basis of the FIR lodged by the respondent No.2 therein alleged that, on 12/05/2025 at about 8.45 p.m., when the informant and his brother Sanjay were distributing sweet milk (kheer) near Buddha Vihar on the Buddha Purnima, the present appellant/accused Abhay Vikas Khillare, along with others, visited there and started abusing them. At that time, another accused Vijay Wadve visited there with knife and uttered that he would not leave Surendra and would finish him.

Thereafter, all the accused persons initially assaulted the deceased Surendra. Accused Vijay Ananda Wadve assaulted Surendra on his back, stomach and forearm. As a result, Surendra fell down, however, all the assailants again assaulted him with fists and blows. When the informant shouted for help and rushed to save his brother, accused Vijay Wadve and his brother Ajay Wadve pushed him away. Thereafter, his brother Surendra started fleeing from the spot through the lane of Buddha Vihar but at that time, the present appellant/accused put his legs between the legs of Surendra (deceased) as a result of which he was fell down. Thereafter, accused/Vijay Wadve assaulted the deceased with knife and committed his murder.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant canvassed that, on 10/02/2026 this Court passed an order in Criminal Appeal No. 500 of 2025 (Swapnil Gyaneshwar Bawane Vs State of Maharashtra and another) and enlarged the appellant/accused on bail. Therefore, it is submitted that the present appellant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant further canvassed that the role attributed to the present appellant is not serious but as per the prosecution case, the appellant/accused Ajay Ananda Wadve pushed deceased. When the deceased was fleeing away from the lane of Buddha Vihar. Another accused Abhay Vikas Khillare obstructed the deceased by putting leg in his legs due to which the deceased was fall down. Thereafter, the main accused (Vijay Wadve), who was armed with a knife, assaulted the deceased. Therefore, considering the role played by the applicant, at par role of another accused Swapnil Gyaneshwar Bawane, the present appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

Learned counsel for the appellant invited attention of this Court to the history narrated by the Medical Officer. The deceased was hospitalized at Global Super Specialty Hospital, Nanded, from 13/05/2025 and the Medical Officer recorded the history as follows :- “21 years male b/b relatives with A/H/O assault with knife by friend due to argument between two at around 9.30 to 12.00 a.m. on 12/05/2025 at Pusad”. Therefore, submits that medical history recorded by the Medical Officer clearly shows that, the dispute arose between two friends and that the incident occurred on account of sudden provocation and as per the medical record, deceased was discharge against medical advice. Therefore, the material placed on record by the Investigating Officer along with charge-sheet prima-facie appears that there were no planning between the accused persons to eliminate the deceased.

Per contra, learned APP and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 vehemently submitted that, on 12/05/2025 at about 8.45 p.m. the informant, his brother as well as other were distributing kheer to the people gathered near the Buddha Vihar in Shivaji Ward. At that time, the accused persons, namely Vijay Ananda Wadve, Ajay Ananda Wadve, Abhay Vikas Khillare (present appellant) and Swapil Gyaneshwar Bawane came to the spot near Buddha Vihar and started abusing Surendra. The accused Vijay Wadve visited at the spot with a knife and uttered that he would not leave Surendra and would kill him. Thereafter, all the accused persons started assaulting the deceased Surendra with fists, kicks and blows. Accused Vijay Ananda Wadve assaulted with knife stabbed the deceased Surendra on his back, chest and stomach with a knife with an intention to kill him, and when the deceased escaped from the clutches of accused and started running from the lane, at that time, another accused Golu @ Abhay Khillare put his legs between the legs of the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased fell down. Thereafter, the main accused, Vijay Wadve, again assaulted the deceased with a knife multiple times and committed his murder. Therefore, the role played by the appellant/ accused obstructing the deceased from fleeing away from the spot amount to helping the main accused while committing the crime. Hence, the role played by the present appellant/accused is at par with the accused Swapnil Gyaneshwar Bawane, who is released on bail by this Court on 10/02/2026 in Criminal Appeal No. 500 of 2025, and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

Needless to mention here that, as per the contents of the FIR, the present appellant was associated with other accused, namely Vijay Wadve, Sanjay Wadve and Swapil Gyaneshwar Bawane who is enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 10/02/2026 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 500 of 2025.

On perusal of the FIR, it prima-facie appears that the main accused/Vijay Wadve, stabbed the deceased with knife on multiple times on his back arm and stomach at the spot and also was fallen down in lane leading to Buddha Vihar when the deceased was fallen down and caused homicidal death.

As per the allegations made in FIR, the accused persons started abusing the informant and his brother in filthy language. At that time, accused Vijay Wadve visited their by holding knife and stated that he will not leave Surendra (deceased) and would finish him. Thereafter all the accused persons started assaulting Surendra with fist blows and kicks. Accused -Vijay Ananda Wadve assaulted the informant’s brother with knife on his back, forearm and stomach. At that time, the deceased fell down, and the other accused persons again started assaulting with fist blows and kicks. When the informant raised an alarm for help and rushed to save his brother, accused Vijay Wadve and his brother Ajay Wadve (present appellant/accused) pushed the informant. Thereafter, when his brother (deceased) started running from Boudh Vihar Lane, another accused namely Abha Khillare, put his leg in the way, due to which the deceased fell down, and accused Vijay Wadve assaulted him with a knife. Thus, prima-facie, it appears that role played by the present appellant/accused is limited to pushing the informant, when the informant had rushed to save his brother. However, there is no role attributed against the present appellant/accused about aiding the main accused Vijay Wadve to kill the deceased accused or to commit the murder of deceased Surendra.

Similarly, the role played by the present appellant/accused is limited to pushing the informant when he had rushed to save his brother. The role played by Swapnil Gyaneshwar Bawane appears that, he extended the assault with fist and kick blows to the deceased. The accused/Swapnil Gyaneshwar Bawane came to be released on bail vide order dated 10/02/2026 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 500 of 2025.

Therefore considering the role attributed to the present appellant/accused is lesser than the role played by the another accused, who is already released on bail. Therefore, considering the ground of parity, the appellant/accused - Ajay Ananda Wadve also entitled to release on the bail during pendency of the appeal.

In view of the above discussion, the impugned order dated 06/12/2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Court No.1), Pusad, District Yavatmal, in Criminal Bail Application No. 481 of 2025, deserves to be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to be released on bail. Hence, I proceed to pass the following order.

A] Criminal appeal is allowed.

B] The impugned order dated 06/12/2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Court No.1), Pusad, in Criminal Bail Application No. 481 of 2025, is hereby quashed and set aside.

C] The appellant -Ajay Ananda Wadve be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 292 of 2025 in connection with Crime No. Sections 109(1), 103(1), 115(2), 3(5), 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity) Act, 1989, during the pendency of the appeal on furnishing on P.R.Bond of Rs. 15,000/- with two solvent sureties in the like amount.

D] The appellant shall furnish the bail bond before the trial Court.

E] The appellant shall furnish his cell number as well as two cell numbers of his close relatives before the investigating officer.

F] The appellant shall regularly appear before the trial Court on each and every dates and shall cooperate with the trial Court for conducting the trial.

G] The two consequent absence of the appellant/accused shall be ground for cancellation of bail.

H] The applicant shall not induce, threat or promise any witnesses who are acquainted with the facts of the case.

I] The fees of the appointed counsel be quantified as per Rule.