Partly allowed

Zoher Sohail Ansari and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC30 Nov 2022ABA/866/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay allowed withdrawal of anticipatory bail application by applicants 1 and 2. For applicants 3, 4 and 5, relatives of the complainant facing general allegations in a matrimonial dispute, the court granted pre-arrest bail without requiring custodial interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed for applicants 3, 4 and 5 on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000/- each with sureties, with directions not to tamper with evidence.

Zoher Sohail Ansari and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra — Dowry and Cruelty | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

aba 866.22.doc

¶2

Urmila Ingale

¶3

Digitally signed URMILA by URMILAPRAMOD PRAMOD INGALE INGALE Date:2022.11.30 19:27:32 +0530

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.866 OF 2022

¶6

Zoher Sohail Ansari

¶7

Sohail Farooque Ansari

¶8

Salma Sohail Ansari 4. Mohd. Shoeb Sohail Ansari 5. Rubina Sohail Ansari ..Applicants vs. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent

¶9

Mr. Nadeem M. S. Shaikh a/w Mr. Mohsin Ansari, for applicants.

¶10

Ms. P.N. Dabholkar, APP for respondent-State. Mr. Ajinkya Udane, for Intervener

¶11

CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶12

DATE : NOVEMBER 30, 2022

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned APP and learned counsel for the intervener.

¶15

2. This is an application for pre-arrest bail. The applicants are apprehending arrest in connection with C.R.

¶16

No. I-210/2022 registered with Mumbra Police Station for

¶17

the offence punishable under sections 498-A, 354, 509,

¶18

¶19

aba 866.22.doc

¶20

323, 504 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

¶21

3. Learned counsel for the applicants as well as interveners tried their level best to resolve the matter as the allegations arise out of the matrimonial dispute. Resolution has failed.

¶22

4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants at the outset submits that he has instructions to withdraw the application so far as it pertains to applicants no. 1 and 2 i.e. Zoher Sohail Ansari (husband of the complainant) and Sohail Farooque Ansari (Father-in-law of the complainant). The application is allowed to be withdrawn so far as the applicants no. 1 and 2 are concerned and it so stands withdrawn. So far as applicants no. 3, 4 and 5 are concerned, they are the relatives of the complainant from the husband’s side.

¶23

5. I have gone through the FIR dated 10/03/2022 registered at the instance of the complainant (wife of the applicant no. 1). There are allegations of ill treatment and demands made. So far as the allegations against the

¶24

¶25

aba 866.22.doc

¶26

applicants no. 3, 4 and 5 are concerned, general allegations are made. There are some allegations against applicant no.4 that he was abusing and assaulting the applicant. These are general allegations without there being any supporting materials.

¶27

6. In this view of the matter, the applicants no. 3 - Salma Sohail Ansari, applicant no. 4-Mohd. Shoeb Sohail Ansari, applicant no. 5-Rubina Sohail Ansari can be granted

¶28

pre-arrest bail as even their custodial interrogation is not required. Hence, the following order.

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

(a) In the event of arrest of the applicants no. 3, 4 and 5 in connection with C.R. No. I-210/2022 registered with Mumbai Police Station, the applicants no. 3 - Salma Sohail Ansari, applicant no. 4-Mohd. Shoeb Sohail Ansari, applicant no. 5-Rubina Sohail Ansari be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount;

¶31

(b) The applicants no. 3, 4 and 5 shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case so as to

¶32

¶33

aba 866.22.doc

¶34

dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and should not tamper with evidence;

¶35

(c) The applicants no. 3, 4 and 5 shall report to the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station as and when required.

¶36

7. I express my gratitude for the able assistance rendered by the advocate- Shri Udane representing the complainant.

¶37

8. The anticipatory bail application is disposed of.

¶38

(M. S. KARNIK, J.)

¶39

Zoher Sohail Ansari and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zoher Sohail Ansari and Anr. v. 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

Moinuddin Aminuddin Goldar Vs State of Maharashtra

Ajit Ramashreay Tiwari Vs State of Maharashtra

Poonam W/O Ajit Tiwari @ Poonam D/O Ramakant Pandey Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Raju Narayan Shetty Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mubashshara Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Maya Pradeep Lohar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra