Partly allowed

Ejaj Ahmad Iqbal Ahmad Shaikh and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC15 Jul 2019ABA/22/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of Bombay High Court disposed of two anticipatory bail applications involving accused for assault under IPC sections 307, 326, 307, etc. Court rejected bail for one applicant due to role and antecedents but granted it to others on conditions. (85 words)

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to four applicants on securing bond of Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties each, subject to conditions; application against Mohd. Shamim Mohd. Yasin Momin rejected.

Ejaj Ahmad Iqbal Ahmad Shaikh and Ors. Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

aba.22 & 23.18.53.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPTORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 22 OF 2018

¶3

Ejaj Ahmad Iqbal Ahmad Shaikh,

¶4

Muzammil Mohd. Shaikh, 3. Anis Mohammed Anwar Momin ...Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶5

WITH ANTICIPTORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 23 OF 2018

¶6

Mohd. Shamim Mohd. Yasin Momin 2. Yusuf Ibrahim Momin @ Yusuf Raza ...Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶7

Mr. Sanjeev Kadam a/w Mr. Balwant V. Salunkhe I/b Mr. Sachin B. Chandan for the Applicants

¶8

Mr. V. V. Gangurde, A.P.P for the Respondent-State

¶9

Ms. Himneel Borse for the Complainant

¶10

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. MONDAY, 15th JULY 2019

¶11

P.C.

¶12

1 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶13

2 By this application, the applicants seek pre-arrest bail in

¶14

connection with C.R. No. I-414 of 2017 registered with the Bhiwandi City

¶15

1/6

¶16

SQ Pathan

¶17

aba.22 & 23.18.53.doc

¶18

Police Station, Thane, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 307, 326, 323, 324, 325, 143, 147, 148, 149 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

3 Perused the papers. According to the prosecution, the incident took place on 15^th December 2017, when the complainant-Hashim Mohd. Shakir Ansari had gone to offer Isha Namaz at Quarter Gate Masjid, Bhiwandi. Since there was a meeting, the said Isha Namaz was kept at 10:00 p.m. It is stated that about 100 to 120 persons including the Maulanas of other Masjids from Bhiwandi had come to attend the said meeting. It is alleged that some of the applicants inquired with one of the person present in the said Masjid, as to why the said Isha Namaz was kept at 10:00 p.m instead of 9:00 p.m. It is alleged that pursuant thereto, Mr. Shakeel Raza informed them that the said decision was of Maulana Yusuf Raza and that they could inquire with him. The complainant accordingly went to Maulana Yusuf Raza and inquired about the same. It is alleged that some persons who were present there, got annoyed and started assaulting the complainant by fists and kick blows. Thereafter, the applicants intervened and they were also assaulted by the members of the complainant

¶20

2/6

¶21

SQ Pathan

¶22

aba.22 & 23.18.53.doc

¶23

group. According to the witnesses, the applicant-Mohd. Shamim Mohd. Yasin Momin assaulted the complainant's brother-Kasim Mohd. Ansari, as a result of which, he was severely injured and fell down. The applicantYusuf Ibrahim Momin @ Yusuf Raza is alleged to have instigated the assailants. As far as applicants in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 22 of 2018 are concerned, they are alleged to have assaulted the complainant and others by fist and kick blows.

¶24

4 It appears that the injured-Kasim Mohd. Ansari (complainant's brother) received a grievous injury on his head due to the assault by wooden log by applicant-Mohd. Shamim Mohd. Yasin Momin. It appears that Kasim Mohd. Ansari was unconscious for four days i.e. from 15^th to 19^th December 2017. It appears that applicant-Mohd. Shamim Mohd. Yasin Momin has several antecedents of a similar nature. Applicant-Yusuf Ibrahim Momin @ Yusuf Raza also has antecedents. The other three applicants have no antecedents.

¶25

5 Having regard to facts, the allegations against the three

¶26

applicants in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 22 of 2018 is that they

¶27

3/6

¶28

SQ Pathan

¶29

aba.22 & 23.18.53.doc

¶30

assaulted the injured with fist blows. As far as applicant-Yusuf Ibrahim Momin @ Yusuf Raza is concerned, although there are antecedents qua him, the allegation in the present FIR is that he instigated the accused to assault the complainant and his brother.

¶31

6 As far as the applicant-Mohd. Shamim Mohd. Yasin Momin is concerned, considering his role i.e. of assault with a wooden log on Kasim's head and the nature of injury sustained by Kasim and keeping in mind his antecedents, this is not a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail to the said applicant.

¶32

7 However, considering the role assigned to the other applicants,

¶33

their prayer for pre-arrest bail is granted, on the following terms and conditions :

¶34

ORDER

¶35

(i) The application qua the applicant-Mohd. Shamim Mohd. Yasin

Momin, is rejected;

4/6

SQ Pathan

aba.22 & 23.18.53.doc

¶40

(ii) The applicants-Ejaj Ahmad, Muzammil Shaikh, Anis Momin,

¶41

and Yusuf Momin @ Yusuf Raza, in the event of their arrest, be enlarged on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/each, with one or two sureties in the like amount;

¶42

(iii) The applicants shall report to the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station as and when called;

¶43

(iv) The applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

¶44

(v) The applicants shall inform their latest places of residence and mobile contact numbers 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;

¶45

(vi) The applicants to cooperate with the investigating agency/conduct of the trial.

¶46

5/6

¶47

SQ Pathan

¶48

aba.22 & 23.18.53.doc

¶49

8 The applications are accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid

¶50

terms.

¶51

9 It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie, for the purpose of deciding these applications.

¶52

10 All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶53

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶54

6/6

¶55

SQ Pathan

Ejaj Ahmad Iqbal Ahmad Shaikh and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ejaj Ahmad Iqbal Ahmad Shaikh and Ors. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Tukaram Kajrolkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajesh Suresh Nishad and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nanso Daniel Nazeque Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohd. Shamim Mohd. Yasin Momin and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Naseer Karim Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ali Hasan Badalu Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra