Allowed

Bazil Shaikh Dastgir v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 Jun 2019ABA/1091/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a case involving allegations of cheating, forgery, and minor threats. The court observed that given the minor nature of the allegations against him compared to the main accused, custodial interrogation was unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on executing a Personal Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000 with one or two sureties.

Bazil Shaikh Dastgir Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1 3 - ABA No.1091-19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1091 OF 2019

¶5

Bazil Shaikh Dastgir ] … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra. ] … Respondent

¶6

Mr. Yogen Kakade a/w Bhagyashree Ghute for Applicant. Smt. A.A. Takalkar, APP for State. Mr. Chandrakant D. Bhosale, Sr. PI Lakshar Police Station, Pune.

¶7

CORAM :- SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE :- 03 JUNE, 2019

¶8

P. C. :-

¶9

The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in connection with

¶10

C.R.No.235/2018 registered with Lakshar Police Station, Pune u/sec.376, 420, 506 r/w 34 of I.P.C.

¶11

The FIR was lodged on 03/11/2018. According to the prosecutrix, she and her family members had invested amount of Rs.12,45,000/- with one Firoz Shaikh. The prosecutrix was assured of handsome returns on her investment. However, the amount or interest were never paid to her. When she tried to confront the said Purti Parab

¶12

1 of 4

¶13

2 3 - ABA No.1091-19.doc

¶14

Firoz Shaikh for repayment, on different occasions Firoz committed rape on her. It is her case that on the first occasion he had given some intoxicating drinks, because of which she had become unconscious. On the next occasion he committed rape by threatening to publish a video clip which was taken by him. In short the entire allegations are against the said Firoz Shaikh.

¶15

As far as present applicant is concerned, he is brother-in-law of the main accused Firoz Shaikh. In the entire FIR there is only one allegation against him. It is mentioned that in January 2018 Firoz Shaikh called the prosecutrix at J.J. Garden. At that time the present applicant had accompanied him. It is her case that while Firoz Shaikh was threatening her, even the present applicant abused and threatened her. The FIR further mentions that, thereafter, because of her shouts Firoz Shaikh and the present applicant ran away. Apart from this allegation, there is absolutely nothing against the present applicant.

¶16

Heard Mr. Yogen Kakade for Applicant and Smt. A.A. Takalkar, APP for State.

¶17

Purti Parab

¶18

2 of 4

¶19

3 3 - ABA No.1091-19.doc

¶20

Ld. Counsel for the applicant submitted that the allegations against Firoz Shaikh were not true. He further submitted that as per the allegations when the first incident of rape had taken place at that time the accused Fauziya Shaikh - wife of Accused No.1 Firoz Shaikh - had delivered a baby girl and she was in hospital. Therefore, according to him when specific role was attributed to Fauziya falsely by the prosecutrix in respect of the first incident of rape, her entire allegations were false.

¶21

It is not necessary to go into the veracity of the allegations pertaining to rape. In this application I am considering the allegations against the present applicant. The allegations against the present applicant are that he is supposed to have abused the prosecutrix and he is supposed to have threatened her in the month of January 2018. The FIR is lodged after about 10 months from that date i.e. on 03/11/2018. In this background, considering the minor nature of allegations against the applicant, custodial interrogation for that particular incident is not necessary. There are no allegations against him in respect of the serious offence committed by his brother-in-law i.e. incidents of rape. Taking all these circumstances into account, no Purti Parab

¶22

3 of 4

¶23

4 3 - ABA No.1091-19.doc

¶24

case is made out for custodial interrogation of the applicant. Hence, the following order.

¶25

ORDER

¶26

In the event of his arrest in connection with C.R. No.235/2018 registered with Lakshar Police Station, Pune, the Applicant be released on bail on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶27

Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶28

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

¶29

4 of 4

¶30

Purti Parab

Bazil Shaikh Dastgir v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bazil Shaikh Dastgir 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

Amar Suresh Rale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Balasaheb Dattaram Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arjun Gajanan Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pammi Bhagwan Chaudhary Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kiran Digambar Mane and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arjun Shripati Sonandkar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra