Dismissed

Gulamali Muradali Makrani and Ors. v. the State of Mah

Bombay HC9 Mar 2012APPLN/455/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court bench rejected a criminal bail application filed by applicants convicted of murder and affray offences. The court held that evidence pointed to serious crimes and found no grounds for releasing the applicants on bail while retaining the record for future hearing.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; permission granted to file a certified private paper-book; records retained for four weeks.

Gulamali Muradali Makrani and Ors. Vs the State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

 cra455.12
1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.455 OF 2012 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.37 OF 2012

¶6

1) Gulamali Muradali Makrani,

¶7

Age-52 years,

¶8

2) Latifali Gulamanli Makrani, Age-27 years,

¶9

3) Sameerali Gulamanli Makrani, Age-25 years,

¶10

4) Shafi- Mohammad AbdulHamid Makrani, Age-37 years,

¶11

5) Haneef Gulam- Rasool Makrani, Age-22 years,

¶12

6) Irfaan Suleman Makrani, Age-25 years,

¶13

7) Saeed Suleman Makrani, Age-21 years,

¶14

8) Imranali Nisarali Makrani, Age-26 years,

¶15

9) Nisarali Noor- Mohammad Makrani, Age-54 years,

¶16

10) Mehmoodali @ Kalu Miyadad Makrani, Age-54 years,

¶17

 cra455.12
2

¶18

All R/o- Mothi-Rajmohi,
Tq-Akkalkuwa, Dist-Nandurbar.

¶19

...APPLICANTS.

¶20

 VERSUS

¶21

The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Akkalkuwa Police Station.

¶22

...RESPONDENTS.

¶23

 ...
 Shri. S.M. Godsay Advocate for Applicants.
 Shri. S.D. Kaldate, A.P.P. for Respondent.
 ...

¶24

CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND
 T.V. NALAWADE, JJ.

¶25

 DATE : 9TH MARCH, 2012.

¶26

PER COURT :

¶27

1.Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶28

2.The Applicants were convicted for (a) an

¶29

offence punishable under Section 302 read with

¶30

Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced
to suffer Rigorous Life Imprisonment, (b) the
offence punishable under Section 324 read with
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced

¶31

 cra455.12
3

¶32

to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for two years, (c)
the offence punishable under Section 147 read with
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced
to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for one year (d)
the offence punishable under Section 148 read with
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced
to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for two years, in
Sessions Case No.6 of 2009, by the Additional
Sessions Judge, Shahada, by Judgment and order
dated 13th January, 2012.

¶33

3.The prosecution case is that all the
Applicants armed with deadly weapons, assaulted
PW-3 Salauddin seriously and caused around
thirteen injuries to deceased Abdullah. Deceased
Abdullah died on the spot. According to medical
Officer, PW-3 Salauddin suffered following
injuries:

¶34

"1. CLW Over right supraarbital
region, 0.5 X 0.5 c.m.

¶35

 cra455.12
4

¶36

2. CLW Over right post aural
region in groove, 0.5 X 0.5
c.m.,

¶37

3. Swelling and tenderness from
nose with fresh bleeding with
Underlines fracture of nasal
crest (dorsum)."

¶38

4.PW-3 Salauddin and other witnesses have

¶39

deposed against the Applicants. According to the
prosecution witnesses, the Applicants were members
of unlawful assembly and in furtherance of their
assembly, they committed serious crime.

¶40

5.Learned counsel Shri. Godsay, appearing
for the Applicants submits that accused Nos. 5, 8

¶41

and 9 were on bail during the trial. No overt-acts
were attributed to them except they being part of

¶42

unlawful assembly, with an object to assault
injured Salauddin and deceased Abdullah. The
counsel had prayed for grant of bail to the
Applicants.

¶43

 cra455.12

¶44

¶45

6.Learned A.P.P. Shri. Kaldate opposed the

¶46

Application by submitting that serious crime has
been committed by the Applicants.

¶47

7.We have perused the original Record and
Proceedings. We find that the deceased suffered
several serious injuries. PW-3 Salauddin too
sustained serious injuries. The injured eye
witness refers to the presence of all these
accused, including accused Nos. 5, 8 and 9.

¶48

8.Theprosecutionwitnesseshave
specifically attributed role of some of the

¶49

accused persons. As to whether any of the accused
person was member of unlawful assembly or not, or
whether any overt-acts were attributed to them,
and if not, what are the consequences, would be
considered after detail scanning of evidence,
which is possible at the time of final hearing of
the Appeal.

¶50

 cra455.12
6

¶51

9.Considering the evidence on record, the

¶52

findings reached by the trial Court, we are not
inclined to release the Applicants on bail. The
Application stands rejected.

¶53

10.At this stage, learned counsel Shri.

¶54

Godsay made alternate request that in case the
Appellants prepare private paper-book, after
certifying the same, the Registry may be directed
to accept the same.

¶55

11.The Appellants are entitled to file

¶56

private paper-book, which would be certified by
the Registry, as per rules.

¶57

12.The Record and Proceedings be retained

¶58

for the period of four weeks from today.

¶59

[T.V. NALAWADE,J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.]

¶60

asb/MAR12

Gulamali Muradali Makrani and Ors. v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulamali Muradali Makrani and Ors. v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Swarajsingh Shivpalsingh Parihar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vatsalabai Klmarotirao Puyad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Tanaji Hari Gaikwad Vs the State of Mah

Dilshad Taher Kazi Vs S N Wangwad

Shaikh Rahim Shaikh Osman and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

The State of Maharshtra Vs Pramod Bajirao Koli and Ors.