Allowed

Shahnur Mohiddin Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC13 Dec 2023ABA/1339/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This anticipatory bail application concerns an apprehension of arrest regarding possession of scented tobacco under IPC Section 328. The court allowed the application noting lack of prima facie evidence linking the applicant to the crime and the completion of recovery of contraband.

What did the court decide?

Application for anticipatory bail allowed; applicant directed to appear before the Investigation Officer to cooperate with further investigation.

Shahnur Mohiddin Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-AUG:26197

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1339 OF 2023

¶4

Shahnur Mohiddin Shaikh VERSUS

¶5

The State Of Maharashtra

¶6

Ms. Priyanka P. Shinde, Advocate h/f Mr. A. K. Bhosle, Advocate for the applicant

¶7

Mr. N. B. Jadhav, APP for the respondent/State

¶8

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 13^th DECEMBER, 2023

¶9

P.C. :-

¶10

Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with Crime No. 732/2023 registered with Pathardi Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 328, 188, 272, 273 of IPC.

¶11

The first information report indicates that on 13/07/2023 secret information was received about scented tobacco etc. being possessed by accused. In the said raid scented tabacco was seized. Offiecne is registered against the applicant under Section 328 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant states that the issue as to whether the offence punishable under Section 328 of IPC would attract to gutkha is pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court. He further states that

¶13

1 of 2

¶14

922.aba1339.23.odt

¶15

the entire recovery is already done, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not necessary. This contention is opposed by the learned APP with the submission that the investigation needs to be done as to the source of the said scented tobacco and hence application be rejected.

¶16

Except for statement of co-accused, there is no any other evidence to connect applicant in this crime. At this stage it cannot be said that the offence punishable under Section 328 of IPC would attract in the present case. As far as the recovery is concerned entire contra band articles are seized during the raid. Nothing is to be recovered that the instance of the applicant. There is no prima facie evidence on record to connect present applicant with crime. So far as further investigation is concerned, in order to find out the source of said contra band, appropriate direction to the applicant to appear before the Investigation Officer would be sufficient. Appropriate direction can be issued to the applicant to appear before Investigating Officer and co-operate in further investigation remained if any. There is no criminal history against the applicant. Applicant has not abused liberty. Hence application is allowed in terms of interim order dated 18^th August, 2023.

¶17

ssp

¶18

2 of 2

¶19

922.aba1339.23.odt

Shahnur Mohiddin Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahnur Mohiddin Shaikh 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

Shahadeo Asaram Humbe Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Tohit Alias Tushar Prakash Zope Vs Minakashi Alias Mona Tushar Zope and Others

Bhaskar Sitaram Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Pandurang Balasaheb Ghadge Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ganesh Subhashrao @ Sudamrao Chintamanichin Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Gangadhar Daulat Dhangar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another