Ba @ Firoz Dilawar Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

1 of 4 919.BA.1217.2019.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1217 OF 2019

¶4

Ba @ Firoz Dilawar Shaikh, Age 36 years,
Occ.Business, R/o.Gulabnagar, Dapodi,
District Pune. (Presently in jail)

¶5

Applicant

¶6

versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra

¶8

Respondent

¶9

Mr.Uday P. Warunjikar i/by Janaki R. Krishnan for applicant.
Smt.Veera Shinde, APP, for State.

¶10

CORAM :PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

¶11

DATE : 18th December 2019

¶12

PC :

¶13

1.This is an application for bail in CR No.668 of 2018 registered
with Bhosari Police Station, Pune for offences under Sections 307,
143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 452, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code r/w
Section 4(25) of Arms Act and u/s 37(1)(3) r/w 135 of Bombay
Police Act.

¶14

2.The applicant was arrested on 1st November 2018. The
prosecution case is that on 1st November 2018 at about 1.30 pm the
applicant along with other accused assaulted the informant by
swords and and trespassed into the property of complainant. The
FIR was registered, investigation was conducted and on completing
the same charge sheet is filed.

¶15

3. Learned advocate for applicant submitted that there are cross cases. The FIR was lodged at the instance of Jai @ Ketya Anand

¶16

2 of 4 919.BA.1217.2019.doc

¶17

Bhise on 1st November 2018 for offences under Sections 307, 143,
147, 148, 149, 452 of IPC r/w Sections 4 and 25 of Arms Act and
under Section 37(1)(3) and 135 of Bombay Police Act. It is
submitted that the wife of the applicant was assaulted by opponents
including the complainant in the present case. It is further submitted
that the accused in that case had preferred applications for bail and
all of them are granted bail. It is further submitted that injuries
sustained by the victim in the present case were not of serious
nature. He was out of danger. On completing investigation charge
sheet is filed. It is submitted that the applicant has some
antecedents, however, the Court may impose some stringent
conditions as preventive measure.

¶18

4.Learned APP submitted that specific overt act has been
attributed to the applicant. He is alleged to have assaulted the
complainant with sword. He also assaulted the complainant by fist
blows. The co-accused had also participated in the crime. The
applicant was externed from locality and after completion of
externment period the applicant is involved in present crime. The
applicant and the co-accused were present near the scene of offence
prior to the incident. Several cases are registered against the
applicant which are pending in appropriate Court. Learned APP
tendered report submitted by Police with regards to antecedents. The
cases were registered with the same police station in 2005, 2008,
2010, 2013, 2015, 2016 and 2017. Out of these about two cases
were registered under Maharashtra Prohibition Act. The other cases
related to offences u/s.323, 324 and one case is registered u/s 307 of
IPC.

¶19

3 of 4 919.BA.1217.2019.doc

¶20

5.I have perused the charge sheet and the documents tendered
by learned counsel for applicant. The incident had occurred on 1st
November 2018. The applicant was arrested on the same day.
Investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed. The cross case is
registered at the instance of Jai @ Ketya Anand Bhise on the same
day. In the cross case it is alleged that the opponents which included
the complainant in the present case and his associates, were involved
in assaulting the complainant Jai @ Ketya Anand Bhise and wife of
applicant. It is also stated that the applicant had managed to save
the complainant Jai @ Ketya Anand Bhise from assault from the
opponents and thereafter the applicant had left the place. It is also
stated that the wife of applicant was assaulted by opponents and
they also caused damage to property in the house. It is also pointed
out that all the accused arrested in the cross case were granted bail.

¶21

6.I have perused the medical certificate in respect to injuries
sustained by the complainant in present case. He has suffered
abrasions on forearm and neck. He also suffered blunt trauma over
chest and left elbow. The cause of injury is by hard and blunt object.
The applicant is in custody for almost one year. On stringent
conditions bail can be granted to the applicant. Hence, I pass
following order :

¶22

ORDER

¶23

(i)Criminal Bail Application No.1217 of 2019 is allowed and
disposed of;

¶24

(ii)The applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection
with CR No.668 of 2018 registered with Bhosari Police Station, Pune,
on furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more
sureties in the like amount;

¶25

4 of 4 919.BA.1217.2019.doc

¶26

(iii)The applicant shall furnish details of his residence where he
propose to reside after release on bail, to the Investigating Officer;
(iv)The applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Bhosari Police
Station, Pune till conclusion of trial;

¶27

(v)The applicant shall attend nearest Police Station where he
would reside, once in a month on every first Saturday between 10
am and 1 pm till further orders;

¶28

(vi)The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and shall attend
Trial Court proceedings regularly, unless exempted by the Trial Court
for some reason.

¶29

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

¶30

MST

Ba @ Firoz Dilawar Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ba @ Firoz Dilawar Shaikh 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

Mushtaq Kasam Khot and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Satishkumar Dharmadev Sharma Vs the State of Maharashtra

Aklak Kondaji Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ranjit Kumar Singh S/O. Garib Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amol Madhukar Gadekar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Santosh Laxman Vaid Vs the State of Maharashtra