Arising from a fatal assault at a construction site under Section 302 IPC, the court rejected the bail application. Despite parity arguments with co-accused, the court held the offence was grave, motives involved the deceased's family, and there was a risk of witness tampering.
Application for bail stands rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
24-ba-911-17.doc
habeeb
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.911 OF 2017
Kamar @ Ekkya Moinuddin Shaikh vs.
… Applicant
The State of Maharashtra … Respondent
Mr. Abdulkarim N. Pathan for the Applicant. Mr. S. H. Yadav, APP for the State.
CORAM : T. V. NALAWADE, J. DATE : 10.08.2017.
P.C.:
2
24-ba-911-17.doc
habeeb
construction site of one housing society were first informant was working as watchman. These present Applicants Ekkya Shaikh, Yogesh Adsul Amya and Kalim Nadaf came on two motor cycles. They started quarrel with Akbar and they started assaulting with kicks and fist blows. When Akbar collapsed, Yogesh Adsul picked up a cement block which was lying there and hit it on the head of Akbar. As the persons started shouting the assailant ran away. Attempt was made to save Akbar by shifting him to hospital but doctor declared that he was already dead. The report came to be given on 27th April 2015 and the crime came to be registered.
3
24-ba-911-17.doc
habeeb
this court hold that there is possibility of tampering of the witnesses from present applicant. It is not fit case to grant relief. In the result application stands rejected.
( T. V. NALAWADE, J. )
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail can be granted to the applicant on grounds of parity with other accused persons.
Whether the present case is fit for granting bail considering the possibility of witness tampering.
Whether the applicant is entitled to benefit of Section 34 IPC regarding joint action.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Kamar @ Ekkya Moinuddin Shaikh
The State of Maharashtra
T. V. NALAWADE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
