Allowed

Shabbu Rauf Khan v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC16 Jul 2013BA/966/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The high court considered a bail application where the applicant's previous liberty to re-applies expired because the trial had not commenced within the stipulated three-month period. The court permitted bail subject to conditions including reporting to police and not contacting witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Applicant ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with sureties and conditional liberty to remain on bail subject to reporting and non-contact conditions.

Shabbu Rauf Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

5-BA-966-2013

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.966 OF 2013

¶5

SHABBU RAUF KHAN )...APPLICANT

¶6

V/s.

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

¶8

)...RESPONDENTS

¶9

Mr.Satyavrat Joshi i/b. Mr.Subhash Hulyalkar Advocate for the Applicant.

¶10

Mrs.G.P.Mulekar APP for the State.

¶11

CORAM: ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.

¶12

DATE : 16^th JULY, 2013.

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

1 Heard Mr.Satyavrat Joshi, the learned counsel for the applicant, and Mrs.G.P.Mulekar, the learned APP for the State.

¶15

2 The previous application filed by the applicant was withdrawn by him, after submitting that the applicant be granted liberty to apply afresh for bail, should the trial not commence within a reasonable time. Liberty was granted by the court to the applicant to apply afresh for bail, in the event of the trial not commencing within a period of three months from the date of the receipt of the said order by the court. The order was passed on 12.4.2013.

¶16

avk 1/3

¶17

5-BA-966-2013

¶18

3 I am informed that, though the said period is over, the trial has not yet commenced. The learned counsel for the applicant has produced a copy of the roznama of the trial court, which indicates that the trial has not yet commenced, and that, even a Charge has not yet been framed.

¶19

4 I have, therefore, considered the facts of the case, afresh. It is clear that though the participation of the applicant in the alleged incident, is indicated by the material in the charge-sheet, the role attributed to the applicant is not as grave, as has been attributed to, two other accused. The applicant is alleged to have given a blow to the deceased by a pana on the wrist of the deceased.

¶20

5 The applicant is of 19 years. There are no antecedents. The applicant is in custody for a period of more than nine months.

¶21

6 Under these circumstances, I am inclined to grant one opportunity to the applicant of availing of liberty, subject to certain conditions.

¶22

7 The application is allowed.

¶23

8 The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, with one surety in the like amount, or two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each, on the following conditions :

¶24

avk 2/3

¶25

5-BA-966-2013

¶26

i) The applicant shall not contact, meet or approach any of the prosecution witnesses, in any manner, whatsoever.

¶27

ii) The applicant shall report to the Pimpri Police Station every Sunday, between 5.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m., till the disposal of the case against him.

¶28

(ABHAY M. THIPSAY, J.)

¶29

avk 3/3

Shabbu Rauf Khan v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shabbu Rauf Khan v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Subhash Bhairu Khot Vs Dastgir Badshaha Khalifa and Anr.

Dr Ranvir Kumar Bindeswari Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Sudhir Vasant Karnataki Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ananda Manku Patil and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dinesh Raosaheb Wayse Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohammed Siraj Ahmed Pathan Vs the State of Maharashtra