Allowed

Firoz Bilal Ansari v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC13 Oct 2021BA/949/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving murder. The court found that witness testimonies were based on hearsay and did not incriminate the applicant with active participation, and there were no criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two/more sureties.

Firoz Bilal Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

Digitally signed by IRESHSIDDHARAM IRESHSIDDHARAMMASHAL MASHAL Date: 2021.10.14 11:00:29 +0530

¶2

31.949.21 BA.doc

¶3

ISM

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 949 OF 2021

FIROZ BILAL ANSARI

….APPLICANT

V/s.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA …..RESPONDENT

¶11

Mr. Devendra Patil advocate for the Applicant Ms. A. A. Takalkar APP for the State Mr. Nilesh Badakh, PI, Shantinagar Police Station

¶12

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. DATE: 13^th OCTOBER, 2021.

¶13

P.C.:

¶14

1] Applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R. No. 339/2018 registered with Shantinagar Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 302, 324, 504, 506, 109 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

2] Prosecution case is, complainant wife of deceased Raju alleged

¶16

murder of her husband by co-accused who was aided by present

1/3

31.949.21 BA.doc

applicant.

3] Said incident was witnessed by minor son of complainant and deceased namely Yunus, however, said witness has not named the applicant with any active role. So also other witness Naushad also not named the applicant.

¶21

4] Though learned APP claimed that other witnesses namely Dayanand Israel and Rafiullah have named the applicant, their testimony appears to be based on hearsay evidence and they have not named the applicant with any specifc attribution of active participation in the offence.

¶22

5] There are no criminal antecedents against the applicant.

¶23

6] In view of above, case for grant of bail is made out. Hence, following order.

¶24

2/3

¶25

31.949.21 BA.doc

¶26

(i) Applicant be released on bail in C.R. No. 339/2018 registered with Shantinagar Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 302, 324, 504, 506, 109 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code upon furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one or two/more sureties in the like amount.

¶27

(ii) Applicant shall neither infuence witnesses in any manner nor tamper with evidence.

¶28

(iii) Applicant shall remain outside the jurisdiction of the concerned police station till the conclusion of the trial.

¶29

7] Application stands disposed of.

¶30

[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.]

¶31

3/3

Firoz Bilal Ansari v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Firoz Bilal Ansari 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

Sanjay Vinayak Medhekar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Krishana Shivkumar Panday Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashok Dattu Bhoir Vs the State of Maharashtra

Chandan Pyarelal Gautam Vs the State of Maharashtra

Amol Baburao Suryavanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nimesh Amarbhai Vachheta Vs the State of Maharashtra