Allowed

Shaziya Abutahir Shaikh and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC19 Jan 2023ABA/145/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single-judge bench of the Bombay High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by two women applicants facing charges under Sections 342, 365, 386, 452, 504, 506 IPC read with Section 34 IPC relating to FIR No. I-571 of 2022. The court held that custodial interrogation was not necessary.

What did the court decide?

The anticipatory bail application was allowed and the applicants granted release on bail in connection with the FIR.

Shaziya Abutahir Shaikh and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

901.aba.145-23.doc

¶2

PMB

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.145 OF 2023

¶5

Digitally signed by PRADNYA PRADNYA MAKARAND MAKARAND BHOGALE BHOGALE Date: 2023.01.19 18:26:52 +0530

¶6

Shaziya Abutahir Shaikh and anr. ..Applicants VS. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent

¶7

Ms. Kusum Pandey a/w Ms. Pragati Mishra for the Applicants.

¶8

Ms. P. N. Dabholkar, APP for the State.

¶9

Mr. Suryavanshi, API and Mr. Chavan, HC, Achole Police Station is present.

¶10

Mr. Prashant Devidas Tavde, Badlapur West Police Station is present.

¶11

CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶12

DATE : JANUARY 19, 2023

¶13

P.C. :

¶14

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned APP for the State.

¶15

2. This is an application for pre-arrest bail in respect of the offence punishable under Sections 342, 365, 386, 452, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in connection with FIR No.I-571 of 2022 dated

¶16

16/11/2022 registered with Achole Police Station.

¶17

3. The FIR is dated 16/11/2022. It is alleged by the first informant in the FIR dated 16/11/2022 that the applicants

1/3

PMB

901.aba.145-23.doc

entered his office and assaulted him with kicks and fist blows. He transferred a sum of Rs.23,000/- in the account of the applicant No.1-Shaziya Shaikh. Further, he was threatened that an amount of Rs.5 lakhs should be paid in the account of the applicant No.1.

¶22

4. On record there are agreements to show that the applicants had invested sums of money in the data entry business of the first informant. In the FIR itself it has been

¶23

stated by the first informant that an amount of Rs.7,70,000/- is owed by him to the applicants. There are transactions between the parties.

¶24

5. Considering the nature of the allegations, the custodial interrogation of the applicants is not necessary. The applicants are women. There are no criminal antecedents reported against the applicants.

¶25

6. Hence, the following order :-

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

(a) Application is allowed.

¶28

(b) In the event of arrest in connection with FIR No.I-571 of 2022 registered with Achole Police Station,

2/3

901.aba.145-23.doc

PMB

the applicants-Shaziya Abutahir Shaikh and Shaikh Ayesha Zafar Alam shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond to the extent of Rs.15,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶33

(c) The applicants shall report to the concerned police station on 24/01/2023 and 25/01/2023 between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. and thereafter as and when called.

¶34

(d) The applicants to co-operate with the Investigating Officer.

¶35

(e) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and shall not tamper with evidence.

¶36

(f) The applicants shall furnish the details of their residential addresses and phone numbers to the investigating officer.

¶37

7. The Anticipatory Bail Application stands disposed of.

¶38

(M. S. KARNIK, J.)

¶39

3/3

Shaziya Abutahir Shaikh and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaziya Abutahir Shaikh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhau Baban Ladhane @ Bhau Baban Ladane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mayuresh Dayanad Kalambe and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra

Mhd. Faisal Ali Sher Ansari Vs State of Maharashtra

Sameer Ahmed Hussain Khan @ Rizwan Khan Vs State of Maharashtra

Rajjab Chunnu Khan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashok Shivram Koli @ Digav Vs the State of Maharashtra