Allowed

Hanzala Ayub Khan v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Oct 2021BA/1736/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed regular bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving assault and use of arms. The court noted the applicant lacked antecedents and had a lesser role compared to co-accused.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; granted bail on furnishing a Rs. 15,000 bond with sureties, subject to conditions regarding witness influence, attendance, and jurisdiction.

Hanzala Ayub Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

Dusane

¶2

1/347 BA 1736.21.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE

¶5

Digitally signed by BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Date: 2021.10.25 19:37:42 +0530

¶6

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1736 OF 2021

¶7

....
Mr. Hanzala Ayub KhanApplicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra ....
Respondent

¶8

Mr. Samyak K. Gimekar for Applicant.
Mr. A.R. Kapadnis, APP for State.
PSI Mali, Shahu Nagar Police Station.

¶9

Coram : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. Date : 25TH OCTOBER, 2021

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1.The applicant is seeking regular bail Crime No.341 of 2020,

¶12

registered with Shahu Nagar Police Station, for an offence punishable

¶13

under Sections 326, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code
and 4 and 25 of Arms Act, in which he was arrested and charge-
sheeted.

¶14

2.The prosecution case is, alongwith brother Maz Khan, the

¶15

applicant assaulted the informant on his head and left hand.

¶16

Dusane

¶17

2/347 BA 1736.21.doc

¶18

3. The role attributed to the applicant is use of wooden bat.

¶19

4. Learned APP opposed the prayer.

¶20

5. Considered submissions.

¶21

6.The fact remains against the applicant are, there are no
antecedents. The role attributed to the applicant is that of use of
wooden bat, whereas role against other accused against whom there
are criminal antecedents is use of knife in commission of crime.

¶22

7.Considering the role attributed to the applicant and medical
reports speaks of cause of simple injuries by using blunt wooden bat, in
my opinion, a case for grant of bail is made out. The application is
allowed on following conditions :

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

(i)The applicant be released on bail in Crime No. 341 of 2020,
registered with Shahu Nagar Police Station, for an offence punishable
under Sections 326, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code
and 4 and 25 of Arms Act, on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of
15,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶25

Dusane3/347 BA 1736.21.doc

¶26

(ii)The applicant shall neither influence the prosecution

¶27

witnesses in any manner nor tamper with the evidence.

¶28

(iii)The applicant shall attend concerned Police Station in first
week of every month from 10.00 am. to 12.00 hours, till charge is
framed.

¶29

(iv)The applicant shall stay outside jurisdiction of the

¶30

concerned Police Station, but for aforesaid cause.

¶31

( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. )

Hanzala Ayub Khan v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanzala Ayub Khan 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

Mrs. Suman Arun Kher Vs Lt.Col.(Retd.) Arun Kumar Kher

Smt.Vatsalabai Baban Dhumal Vs Baban Jaywant Kad and Ors.

Nilesh Uttamchand Jain Vs Suchita Nilesh Jain

Bharat Khandu Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Indira Vitthal Pujari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Murtuza Khalil Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra