Allowed

Sohel Mahatab Nadaf v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC5 Oct 2023ABA/2374/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail application, the Bombay High Court, relying on the applicant's cooperation with investigation and the prima facie view that he was not an assailant, converted the interim bail order dated 24th August, 2023 into an absolute order.

What did the court decide?

Order of interim bail dated 24.08.2023 is made absolute on terms and conditions incorporated therein.

Sohel Mahatab Nadaf Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-AS:29466

¶2

7-ABA2374-2023.DOC

¶3

Santosh

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2374 OF 2023

¶6

Sohel Mahatab Nadaf ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra …Respondents

¶7

Mr. Hrishikesh Shinde, for the Applicant. Mrs. Geeta Mulekar, for the State/Respondent. PC G. U. Komade, MIDC Police Station, Solapur City,

¶8

present.

¶9

CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED: 5^th OCTOBER, 2023

¶10

ORDER:-

¶11

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶12

By an order dated 24^th August, 2023 this Court was

¶13

persuaded to grant interim protection observing inter alia as

¶14

under:

¶15

“3. The allegations against the applicant, prima facie, seem to be that of facilitating the change of shirt of the assailant Mahesh Shejerao after the occurrence and destruction of the shirt which the said assailant was wearing at the time of occurrence. The applicant seems to have been impleaded primarily for the offence punishable under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of statement of coaccused under section 27 of Indian Evidence Act.

¶16

In the charge-sheet also, it does not seem to be the prosecution case that the applicant was one of the assailants. The applicant is stated to be prosecuted for the offence punishable under section 201 of the Penal Code. Therefore, a prima facie case is made out to grant interim protection.”

¶17

1/2

¶18

7-ABA2374-2023.DOC

¶19

The learned APP, on instructions of the Investigating Officer, who is present in Court, informs the Court that the applicant has appeared before the Investigating Officer and cooperated with the investigation. Having regard to the nature of the accusation further custodial interrogation of the applicant does not seem to be warranted as prima facie the applicant is not alleged to be one of the assailants. Hence, I am impelled to make the order of interim bail absolute.

¶20

Hence, the following order:

¶21

: O R D E R :

¶22

(i) Order of interim bail dated 24^th August, 2023 is made

¶23

absolute on the terms and conditions incorporated therein.

¶24

(ii) The applicant shall henceforth appear before the Investigating Officer as and when directed.

¶25

(iii) The applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court.

¶26

Application stands disposed.

¶27

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

¶28

2/2

Sohel Mahatab Nadaf v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohel Mahatab Nadaf 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

Raju Ramchandra Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Subhash Chand Katoch Vs State of Maharashtra

Sabita Bhalotia Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pravinchandra Manilal Shah Vs State of Maharashtra

Shree Krushna Logistic Vs Maharashtra Rajya Mathadi Transport and General Kamgar Union and Anr.

Abubakar Jubair Namakwalla Vs State of Maharashtra