Allowed

Mehboob Ibrahim Kherani and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC26 Aug 2021ABA/1514/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to applicants charged with causing death while injuring a complainant in a dispute between housing society promoters. Despite a charge-sheet being filed and death caused, bail was allowed as external injuries did not prima facie correspond to internal causes of death.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail upon executing a P.R. bond of Rs.25,000 with sureties and complying with reported dates and conditions regarding witness interference.

Mehboob Ibrahim Kherani and Anr. Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

3-aba-1514-19 with ia-1137-21 with ia-542-21-full order

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1514 OF 2019

¶4

Mehboob Ibrahim Kherani & Anr...Applicants
 V/s.
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent

¶5

WITH

¶6

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1137 OF 2021

¶7

Shahnaz Mohammed Jafar Shaikh..Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Mehboob Ibrahim Kherani & Anr...Applicants
 V/s.
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent

¶8

WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.542 OF 2021

¶9

Mohammed Rafique Abbdul Sattar Sayyed & Ors...Applicants

¶10

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

¶11

Mehboob Ibrahim Kherani & Anr...Applicants
 V/s.
The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent

¶12

Mr.Sudeep Pasbola i/b Mr.Karl P. Rustomkhan for the Applicants.

¶13

Ms.Misbaah Solkar for the Applicant in IA 1137 of 2021.

¶14

Mr.Ansh Karnawat a/w Mr.ikhail Dey i/b Dinesh Tiwari & Associates
for the Intervenors in IA 542 of 2021.

¶15

Mr.Y.Y. Dabke, APP, for the Respondent-State.

¶16

3-aba-1514-19 with ia-1137-21 with ia-542-21-full order

¶17

CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J.

¶18

DATE : 26 August 2021

¶19

P.C.

¶20

.By this application the Applicants (Accused Nos.8 and
16), apprehending their arrest in connection with the investigation
of Crime No.140 of 2019, BKC Police Station, under section 302,
323, 324,143,147,148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’ for
short) are seeking anticipatory bail.

¶21

2.The complainant Mohhamad Rafiq Sayyed Abdul Sattar

¶22

had posted a video on a social networking site claiming that the
local corporator was supporting HDIL and Omkar Builders in respect
of an SRA Project namely Basera Housing Society formed by HDIL
and Omkar Builders. It appears that the complainant along with
others including the deceased Amir Zafar Shaikh @ Babubhai had
also proposed a society by name KGN Housing Society somewhere in
November 2018 in the area of Bharat Nagar, Bandra (East),
Mumbai. The incident in question appears to be a outcome of the
rivalry/disputes between the promoters of the two societies.

¶23

N.S. Kamble page 2 of 8

¶24

3-aba-1514-19 with ia-1137-21 with ia-542-21-full order

¶25

3.According to the complainant on 31 May 2019 at about
22.45 hours when the complainant along with other members of the
KGN Society were sitting infront of Plot No.7, Tata Colony, Bharat
Nagar, Bandra (East) and were chitchatting, one Mohammed Salim,
who is the husband of the local Corporator, came there along with
his associates. According to the complainant Salim Qureshi accosted
the complainant as to how the complainant is claiming that he
(Salim Queshi) was working as a middleman for the builders. The
complainant is alleged to have asked Salim Qureshi to first see the
video uploaded on the social networking site. It is at this stage that
Salim Qureshi is alleged to have assaulted the complainant with fist
blows. Insofar as the present applicants are concerned it is alleged
that the applicant Mehboob Ibrahim Khairani was having a wooden
stick while the applicant Tariq Khan @ Bapuji was having an iron
rod and they assaulted the complainant on his head and right thigh.
Further according to the complainant deceased Amir Zafar Shaikh @
Babubhai tried to intervene when he was taken aside and assaulted,
as a result of which Amir Zafar Shaikh sustained injuries. He was
taken to the hospital where he was declared dead. On the basis of
such a complaint the aforesaid offence came to be registered.

¶26

page 3 of 8

¶27

3-aba-1514-19 with ia-1137-21 with ia-542-21-full order

¶28

4.It may be mentioned that according to the prosecution
partial investigation is complete and charge-sheet is filed against the
applicants and others on 4 August 2020. The Investigating Officer
has reserved liberty to carry out further investigation under Section
173(8) of Cr.P.C.

¶29

5.I have heard the learned counsel for the Applicants and
the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. I have also heard the
learned counsel for the Intervenor namely Shahnaz Mohammed
Jafar Shaikh who is the widow of the deceased and the complainant
Mohammad Rafiq Sayyed Abdul Sattar and others. I have gone
through the charge-sheet and the record.

¶30

6.It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants
that the applicants have been falsely implicated and the allegations
by the complainant, about an assault by the applicants is not
substantiate by the medical evidence. It is pointed out that the
deceased is shown to have sustained three linear abrasions on the
right knee and the cause of death is shown to be primary shock
following contusions, over lung, liver associated with ischemic heart
disease, coronary insufficiency and alcohol intoxication (unnatural).
It is thus submitted that the cause of death is not relatable to any

¶31

N.S. Kamble page 4 of 8

¶32

3-aba-1514-19 with ia-1137-21 with ia-542-21-full order

¶33

assault or injuries sustained by the deceased. It is submitted that
the investigation is complete and charge-sheet is filed.

¶34

7.The learned counsel for the applicants pointed out that
some of the accused were released on bail while the others are
granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge.

¶35

8.The learned APP submitted that the offence is serious
and it is necessary for the Investigating Officer to carry out further
investigation. He therefore submitted that, notwithstanding filing of
the charge-sheet the applicants are not entitled for the protection.

¶36

9.The learned counsel for the Intervenors have pointed
out that even where the death is accelerated on account of any act
or assault by the accused, the same would come within the ambit of
Explanation 1 to Section 299 of IPC.The learned counsel for the
intervenors have pointed out that the Medical Officer has found
contusions on the lung and liver which in the submission of the
learned counsel for the intervenors are possible due to the assault.
It is submitted that the applicants are also trying to threaten the
witnesses and therefore would misuse the liberty and protection.

¶37

N.S. Kamble page 5 of 8

¶38

3-aba-1514-19 with ia-1137-21 with ia-542-21-full order

¶39

10.I have carefully considered the rival circumstances and
the submissions made. The prosecution case is about an assault on
the complainant and causing death of Amir Zafar Shaikh @
Babubhai. Insofar as the complainant is concerned prima faice the
injury certificate shows, three simple injuries and the complainant
was treated in the OPD. Insofar as the deceased Amir @ Babubhai is
concerned, the cause of death is shown to be primary shock
following contusions, over lung and liver, associated with ischemic
heart disease, coronary insufficiency and alcohol intoxication
(unnatural). As per column No.17 there are three linear abrasions
shown to be present on the right knee of the deceased. Although on
behalf of the intervenors reliance is placed on explanation 1 of
Section 299 of the IPC prima facie there are no external injuries
shown which may correspond to the internal injuries found on the
lung and the liver. Partial investigation is said to be complete and
the charge-sheet is filed against as many as 16 accused. Out of the
said accused seven have been released on regular bail while seven
others have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions
Judge. The record discloses that interim protection was granted to
the Applicants by this Court (Revati Mohite Dere, J.) on 4 October
2019 and is operating since then. It appears that the incident was
the outcome of the rivalry between two SRA Societies.

¶40

3-aba-1514-19 with ia-1137-21 with ia-542-21-full order

¶41

Rider

¶42

11.The applicants are stated to be permanent residents of
Bharat Nagar, Bandra (East), Mumbai. The apprehension expressed
on behalf of the prosecution/intervenors can be taken care of by
imposing appropriate conditions.

¶43

12.Considering the overall circumstances, and having
regard to the fact that the interim protection is operating since 4
October 2019, in my considered view, the application can be
allowed.

¶44

13.It is made clear that the observations herein are

¶45

essentially of a prima facie nature, for the limited purpose of
deciding the application for anticipatory bail and the learned
Sessions Judge shall not be influenced by the same at the trial.

¶46

14. In the result the following order is passed.

¶47

ORDER

¶48

(i)In the event of their arrest in connection with
investigation of Crime No. 140 of 2019 registered with
BKC Police Station, the Applicants shall be released on
bail on executing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-

¶49

page 7 of 8

¶50

3-aba-1514-19 with ia-1137-21 with ia-542-21-full order

¶51

each with one or two solvent sureties each in the like

¶52

amount.

¶53

(ii)The applicants shall report to the Investigating
Officer on 30 August 2021, 6 September 2021 and 13
September 2021 between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. and
as and when required by the Investigating Officer.

¶54

(iii)The applicants shall co-operate with the
Investigating Agencies and shall not make any attempt
to directly or indirectly contact, influence, threaten or
otherwise tamper with the prosecution
evidence/witnesses.

¶55

(iv)In the event of breach of any of the conditions the

¶56

bail is liable to be cancelled.

¶57

(v)The Criminal Application is disposed of in the

¶58

aforesaid terms.

¶59

C.V. BHADANG, J.

¶60

NILAM Digitally signed byNILAM SANTOSH SANTOSH KAMBLE KAMBLE Date: 2021.08.2615:09:28 +0530

¶61

N.S. Kamble page 8 of 8

Mehboob Ibrahim Kherani and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mehboob Ibrahim Kherani and Anr. 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

Liyakat Faizullah Khan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunil Tukaram Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Afroz Tasduk Qureshi and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

The Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Company Limited Mumbai- 400025 Vs Ashok Narang and Anr.

Jagdevi Sunil Patil and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashok Dayaram Sakpal Vs the State of Maharashtra