Dismissed

Mohd. Akram Idrishi v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC26 Jun 2019BA/527/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application rejected by the Court. The applicant was accused of planning and monitoring a robbery. The Court found prima facie material against him based on the prosecution case, confessions, and recovery. The bail application was dismissed, and the trial was expedited.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; trial expedited. Observations recorded as prima facie only.

Mohd. Akram Idrishi Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

ba.527.19.29.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 527 OF 2019

¶3

Mohd. Akram Idrishi ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶4

Ms. Shabana F. Sothe I/b S. P. Associates for the Applicant

¶5

Mr. S. V. Gavand, A.P.P for the Respondent-State

¶6

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. WEDNESDAY, 26th JUNE 2019

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

1 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

2 By this application, the applicant seeks his enlargement on bail

¶10

in connection with C.R. No. 362 of 2018 registered with the Khar Police Station, Mumbai, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 397, 452, 341, 342, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶11

3 Perused the papers. According to the prosecution, the incident took place on 5^th September 2018 at around 9:30 a.m. According to the complainant-Kohinoor, someone rang the door bell and stated that he had come to deliver a parcel and suddenly, before she could react, the said

1/3

SQ Pathan

ba.527.19.29.doc

person forcibly entered the house. Two persons followed him in the house. The said two persons are alleged to have gagged the complainant, taken her to her bedroom and then put a tape on her mouth, as a result of which, she could not shout. One amongst them threatened to kill the complainant and her daughter, if she did not give money. One of the accused placed the knife on her neck and told her that if she did not give money, they would kill her. Pursuant thereto, the accused pulled out Rs. 60,00,000/- from the cupboard, which was in a red bag, and asked the complainant to hand over her six golden bangles, which she was wearing and also took a mobile phone and fled from the spot.

¶16

4 It appears, that the applicant is not amongst the said three persons who entered the house. According to the prosecution, the applicant is the person, who planned and plotted the commission of the offence. It is the prosecution case, that the applicant was standing outside the building and monitoring the activities of the co-accused. In the investigation, a red bag in which the money was carried, was recovered from the house of the co-accused, pursuant to the disclosure statement made by the applicant. Similarly, Rs. 10,00,000/- were also recovered from the house of the

2/3

SQ Pathan

ba.527.19.29.doc

co-accused at the instance of the applicant. It appears that there is an extrajudicial confession made by the applicant to Mohammed Anas Naeem Ahmed. According to the said witness, the applicant had disclosed to him that on 5^th September 2018, he along with three accused had committed robbery at a flat in Bhoomi Height Building. He also confessed that he was keeping a watch outside the said building, when his three associates entered the house and committed robbery. The complainant has identified the other three co-accused. As far as the applicant is concerned, the question of identifying him, does not arise, since he was standing outside the building.

¶21

5 Considering the prima facie material on record, this is not a fit

¶22

case to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the application is rejected. However, the trial of the applicant is expedited.

¶23

6 It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima

¶24

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.

¶25

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶26

3/3

¶27

SQ Pathan

Mohd. Akram Idrishi v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Akram Idrishi 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

Karan Singh Chadha Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Ehsaan Sabir Alam and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ram Baban Baswant and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashraf Saba Shahid Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohanlal Bhawarlal Jain Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Vipul Ambani Vs Union of India and Anr.