Allowed

Parvez Dawood Ali Sheikh and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC12 Oct 2015BA/1599/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by two accused persons charged with murder. The court granted bail on personal bond with sureties and specific conditions including attendance at the police station and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by execution of personal bond of Rs. 25,000 each with sureties, subject to specific conditions of attendance and non-interference.

Parvez Dawood Ali Sheikh and Anr. Vs the State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

BA 1599-15.doc

¶2

Anand

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1599 OF 2015

¶5

1. Parvez Dawood Ali Sheikh .Applicants

¶6

2. Jafar Vajir Sheikh

¶7

 v/s.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra .Respondent

¶9

WITH

¶10

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.836 OF 2015 (For Intervention) IN

¶11

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1599 OF 2015

¶12

Mohammed Shafique Abdul .Intervenor
Majid Shaikh

¶13

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

¶14

1. Parvez Dawood Ali Sheikh .Applicants

¶15

3. Jafar Vajir Sheikh

¶16

 v/s.

¶17

The State of Maharashtra .Respondent

¶18

Mr.M.A.H.Solkar, Advocate, for the Applicants
Mr.S.S.Pednekar, APP, for the Respondent – State
Mr.A.Naik i/b. Mr.R.P.Khobragade, Advocate,
for the Intervenor

¶19

CORAM:REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
DATE :12.10.2015

1 of 7

BA 1599-15.doc

P.C.

.Heardlearnedcounselforthe

¶24

applicants and the learned APP for the
respondent – State.

¶25

2.By this application, the applicants

¶26

seek their enlargement on bail in connection
with C.R.No.41 of 2015 registered with the
Agripada Police Station, Mumbai, for the alleged
offence punishable under Section 302 r/w.34 of
the Indian Penal Code.

¶27

3.The complainant is one Mohammed

¶28

Shafique Abdul Majid Shaikh. He has alleged that

¶29

the incident took place on 21.02.2015 at about
9.00 p.m.. It is alleged in the complaint that

¶30

he was informed by Taufique (deceased) that
there was a meeting for settling the account
between Taufique and Dawood. It is alleged that

¶31

during the meeting, there was a small

¶32

2 of 7

¶33

BA 1599-15.doc

¶34

altercation between the two groups. It is

¶35

alleged that suddenly, co-accused Vajir caught

¶36

hold of Taufique and pushed him, pursuant to
which, he fell on the ground. It is alleged that
at that time, the applicant No.2 - Jafar
assaulted Taufique on his head with an iron
stool, which was at the spot and the applicant
No.1 – Parvez assaulted Taufique with fist
blows. It is alleged that thereafter, Taufique
ran towards Sagar Medical Stores and that the
applicant No.2 – Jafar followed him and
assaulted him with kick blow on his private

¶37

part, pursuant to which he fell down.
Thereafter, people intervened and took Taufique
to the hospital when he was declared dead.

¶38

4.Learned counsel for the applicants

¶39

states that the incident in question took place

¶40

on the spur of moment, as is evident from the
FIR itself. He submits that co-accused – Vajir

¶41

3 of 7

¶42

BA 1599-15.doc

¶43

has been enlarged on bail by this Court (CORAM :

¶44

SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.) vide order dated
03.08.2015. He submits that admittedly, no
weapon was carried by any of the applicants and
that the incident had taken place on the spur of

¶45

moment. He submits that the injury sustained by
the deceased was one contusion on his head which
is reflected in column no.17 of the post mortem
report.

¶46

5.Learned APP does not dispute the fact

¶47

that the incident had taken place on the spur of
moment. However, he states that the applicant
No.2 – Jafar had caused the fatal blow. He
states that the applicants have no antecedents.

¶48

6.Perused the charge-sheet as well as the
order dated 03.08.2015 enlarging co-accused
Vajir on bail. From column 17 of the post mortem

¶49

report, it appears that the injury sustained by

¶50

4 of 7

¶51

BA 1599-15.doc

¶52

the deceased was, 'contusion of size 3 x 2 cm
over right side of forehead, above middle of
right eyebrow. It was reddish in colour. It
appears that the incident took place on the spur
of moment. There is only one injury. It also
appears from column 20(g) of the post mortem
report that there was concentric block to the
extent of 50-60% to the right coronary of the
deceased.

¶53

7.Considering the aforesaid and the fact

¶54

that investigation is complete and charge-sheet
is filed, the applicants are enlarged on bail on
the following terms & conditions:

¶55

ORDER

¶56

(i) The applicants be enlarged on bail, on

¶57

executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each
with one or two sureties in the like amount;

¶58

(ii) The applicants shall attend the
Agripada Police Station, Mumbai on the first

¶59

5 of 7

¶60

BA 1599-15.doc

¶61

Saturday of every month between 10:00 a.m. to
11:00 a.m. till the conclusion of the trial;

¶62

(iii) The applicants shall not tamper or

¶63

attempt to influence or contact the complainant,
witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

¶64

(iv) The applicants shall inform their
latest place of residence and mobile contact
number immediately after being released
and/or change of residence or mobile details,
if any, from time to time to the Court seized
of the matter and to the Investigating Officer
of the concerned Police Station;

¶65

(v) The applicants to cooperate with the
conduct of the trial;

¶66

(vi) If there is a breach of any of the

¶67

aforesaid conditions, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to seek cancellation of the
applicants' bail.

¶68

6 of 7

¶69

BA 1599-15.doc

¶70

8.The Application is allowed in the

¶71

aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶72

9.In view of disposal of the Application,
Intervention Application does not survive and
the same stands disposed of accordingly.

¶73

10. It is made clear that the observations

¶74

made herein are prima facie, and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶75

authenticated copy of this order.

¶76

7 of 7

Parvez Dawood Ali Sheikh and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parvez Dawood Ali Sheikh and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

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

Sagar Raju Nangare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kiran Alias Amar Anat Baghade Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kamlesh Ramesh Chakor Vs the State of Maharashtra

Seema Sandip Chandra Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amol Vibhishan Dain and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ratan Pallani Shetty Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.