Allowed

Mohammed Dilshad Kaleem S/O. Mohammed Peer Pasha Ahmed v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC5 Jul 2023ABA/348/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This anticipatory bail application was allowed. The bench, noting that bail had been granted to a similarly placed co-accused on similar facts, found no reason to deny parity and held that the investigation did not require custody of the applicant.

What did the court decide?

The interim order was modified to allow the application for anticipatory bail.

Mohammed Dilshad Kaleem S/O. Mohammed Peer Pasha Ahmed Vs… — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

aba348.23.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 348 OF 2023

¶5

Mohammed Dilshad Kaleem

¶6

Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

Respondent

¶10

Mr. S. R. Bagal, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. G. O. Wattamwar, APP for the State.

¶11

CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 5^th JULY, 2023.

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is a Civil Engineer, registered with Municipal Corporation. It is alleged against him and co-accused Shaikh Aharaj of making false signatures on fle of gunthewari record and offence is regsitered against them and others vide Crime No. 443/2022 registered with Vazirabad Police Station.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant states that similarly placed co-accused has been granted bail by learned Additional Sessions Judge. Perusal of the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge granting bail to the co-accused and

¶15

¶16

aba348.23.odt

¶17

rejecting bail to the present applicant indicates that on similar set of facts it is held that custody of the applicant is necessary whereas custody of the co-accused was not found necessary. There is absolutely no reason or justifcation to pass such divergent orders in respect of accused persons whose role is absolutely identical.

¶18

Perusal of First Information Report shows that there is allegation in respect of preparation of bogus record of Gunthewari certifcate and bogus outward numbers are also recorded. It is alleged that thereby fnancial loss is caused to the exchequer of Municipal Corporation.

¶19

Learned APP states that though the proposal was submitted by present applicant and the co-accused to whom anticipatory bail is granted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, along with said proposal forged receipts are produced. If it is so, it was absolutely necessary for the Investigating Agency to move an application for cancellation of bail granted to the co-accused. Said order is passed on 25^th January, 2023. For last six months, the prosecution did not fnd it necessary to move any such application. Only inference from this which can be drawn that no custodial

¶20

aba348.23.odt

¶21

interrogation of accused is needed by Investigating Agency. Thus, no substance in the contention of learned APP. This Court fnds no reason to deny parity to this applicant. applicant’s liberty was protected and suffcient opportunity and time was given to Investigating Offcer to carry out effective investigation. There is nothing to show that liberty is misused by the applicant.

¶22

In view of above, application is allowed in terms of the

¶23

interim order.

¶24

dyb

Mohammed Dilshad Kaleem S/O. Mohammed Peer Pasha Ahmed v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Dilshad Kaleem S/O. Mohammed Peer Pasha Ahmed v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Shrikrushna Rajendra Kolhe Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ganesh Janardhan Kakde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Ajinath Gorakh Jagdale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gayabai Wd/O. Sadhurao Kotambe and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Nityanand Jayant Bhogle Vs Sachin Uttamrao Gaikwad

Rushikesh Madhukarrao Ajabe and Others Vs Swati W/O Rushikesh Ajabe and Another