Allowed

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

Bombay HC21 Aug 2021IA/1246/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Court granted interim bail to applicants convicted of attempts to murder under IPC Section 307 and abetment under Section 452/34 IPC, suspended their substantive sentences pending appeal disposal, directing execution of a bond. Order concludes the application.

What did the court decide?

Suspended substantive sentence pending appeal; granted interim bail on execution of Rs. 25,000 bond with sureties.

Afroz Tasduk Qureshi and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

1-ia-1246-2020 in apeal-51-2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1246 OF 2020

¶4

IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.51 OF 2020

¶6

Afroz Tasduk Qureshi and Anr...Applicants
 V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors...Respondents

¶7

Mr.M.R. Deshpande, for the Applicants.

¶8

Mrs.Veera Shinde, APP, for the Respondent-State.

¶9

NILAM Digitally signed byNILAM SANTOSH SANTOSH KAMBLE KAMBLE Date: 2021.08.2115:24:08 +0530

¶10

CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J.

¶11

DATE : 21 August 2021

¶12

P.C.

¶13

.This is an application for suspension of sentence and

¶14

release of the Applicants (Accused Nos.2 and 3) on bail. This
Application is placed before this Bench, in view of the order dated
24 September 2020 passed by this Court (A.S. Gadkari, J.) and the
order dated 2 February 2021 passed by this Court (S.K. Shinde, J.).
inasmuch as the earlier application being Interim Application No.1
of 2020 filed by the Applicants was withdrawn on 28 August 2020,
with liberty to renew the request.

¶15

N.S. Kamble page 1 of 4

¶16

1-ia-1246-2020 in apeal-51-2020

¶17

2.The Applicants along with the co-accused Nos.1 and 4
were prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 307 and
452 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under the
Maharashtra Police Act. By the impugned judgment the Applicants
have been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 307
for which they have been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for 7
years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default to suffer
further rigorous imprisonment for the period of three months. Under
Section 452 of IPC the Applicants have been sentenced to suffer
rigorous imprisonment for one year and pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-
each and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for the period of
one month. The Applicants have been acquitted of the offence
under the Maharashtra Police Act. It may be mentioned that the
Original Accused Nos.1 and 4 expired during the course of the trial.

¶18

3.I have heard the learned Counsel for the Applicants and
the learned Additional Public Prosecutor. Perused record.

¶19

4.As per the prosecution case and the complaint lodged
by Sadik Qureshi resident of Parvati Darshan, Pune, he was residing
jointly with his brothers Abid and Sabid who were engaged in the
business of sale and purchase of cattles. Prior to one month of the

¶20

N.S. Kamble page 2 of 4

¶21

1-ia-1246-2020 in apeal-51-2020

¶22

incident, the complainant Sabid started a beef shop at Parvati
Darshan Chawl in the rented premises of one Wajid Shaikh. Brother
of the complainant namely Abid used to look after that shop. The
original Accused No.1 and the present Applicant and the Accused
No.4 are residing adjacent to the said shop and they were also
engaged in the same business of beef shop. The Applicants and the
co-accused are alleged to have objected to the complainant for
starting the beef shop in the same area. This incident took place a
month prior to the incident in question.

¶23

5.On the day of the incident at about 12.15 noon one Arif
Rafiq Shaikh came and the complainant was having discussion with
him. At that time the Accused No.1 Tasduk (since deceased) armed
with iron rod, the Applicant Afroz, armed with sword and Amroz
armed with Sattur and Firoz (since deceased) armed with a knife
assaulted the complainant. On the basis of such a complaint an
offence came to be registered.

¶24

6.I have considered the submissions made by the parties.
It appears that the Applicants were on bail during the course of the
trial and there are no allegations that they have misused the liberty.
The Applicants have been sentenced to suffer imprisonment of 7

¶25

N.S. Kamble page 3 of 4

¶26

1-ia-1246-2020 in apeal-51-2020

¶27

years. Considering the over all circumstances and the nature of the
incident which arose out of business rivalry between the parties, I
find that subject to conditions the Applicants can be released on bail.
In such circumstances, the following order is passed.

¶28

ORDER

¶29

(i)The substantive sentence awarded to the

¶30

Applicants/Accused is hereby suspended pending disposal
of the Appeal.

¶31

(ii)The Applicants shall be released on bail on
executing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/-each with
one or two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge and to pay fine,
if not, already paid.

¶32

(iii)The Criminal Application is disposed of in the
aforesaid terms.

¶33

C.V. BHADANG, J.

¶34

page 4 of 4

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Prakash Manilal Thakrar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shailesh Kuvarji Gala and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajwinder Singh Ajit Singh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Liyakat Faizullah Khan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunil Tukaram Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kaiser Jahana Rauf Sayyed and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra