Allowed

Azeem Azeez Shaikh and Another v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 Jul 2023ABA/396/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to two applicants facing charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code for an assault. The court observed that while the applicants were present and held sticks, they did not cause the alleged injuries on the informant or witnesses, as the injuries could not be attributed to the wooden sticks.

What did the court decide?

Applications allowed in terms of interim orders dated 21st March, 2023 & 23rd March, 2023 respectively.

Azeem Azeez Shaikh and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

39-ABA-386-2023+.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.386 OF 2023

¶4

SHAIKH RIZWAN SHAIKH DAGDU

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶7

WITH

¶8

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 396 OF 2023

¶9

AZEEM AZEEZ SHAIKH AND ANOTHER

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶12

. . .

¶13

Advocate for Applicant in ABA/386/2023: Mr. S. A. Patel
Advocate for Applicant in ABA/396/2023: Mr. A. K.
Bhosle

¶14

APP for Respondent – State : Mr. G. O. Watamwar

¶15

...

¶16

CORAM:R.M. JOSHI, J
DATE:JULY 03, 2023

¶17

PER COURT :

¶18

1.Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with

¶19

with C.R. No. 6 of 2023 registered with Chikalthana
Police Station, Aurangabad for the offences punishable
under Sections 307, 324, 323, 504, 506, 427, 143, 147,
148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

2.At the outset, learned Counsels for the

¶21

Applicants state that charge-sheet has been filed and
that no further investigation left to have been done in

¶22

Page 1 of 3

¶23

39-ABA-386-2023+.odt

¶24

the matter. By referring to the charge-sheet, it is
contended that the allegations of actual causing of
assault on the informant and the witnesses are against
co-accused.

¶25

3.Learned APP opposed the applications by

¶26

submitting that the presence of the Applicants can be
seen in the CCTV footage having wooden sticks in their
hands. It is also contended that since the Applicants

¶27

were absconding, charge-sheet has been filed under
Section 299 of Cr.P.C.

¶28

4.Perusal of the charge-sheet shows that the
first information report is lodged against unknown
persons. It is also seen that the informant and others
sustained injuries in the said assault. Later on, on
the basis of CCTV footage identification of the
assailants were ascertained. Undisputedly, present
Applicants did not cause assault on the informant or
witnesses. Injury certificate shows that CLW were
caused to them which cannot be attributed to the wooden

¶29

sticks. Merely because, Applicants were present at the
spot their liberty cannot be denied. Since the charge-

¶30

sheet is filed, nothing is to be recovered at their

¶31

Page 2 of 3

¶32

39-ABA-386-2023+.odt

¶33

instance.

¶34

5.Pertinently, the Applicants are protected by
interim order dated 21st March, 2023. In spite of the
same, the investigating officer did not find it
necessary to call upon them to remain present for
further investigation. This indicates that nothing is
to be recovered at their instance. Hence, the
applications are allowed in terms of interim order
dated 21st March, 2023 & 23rd March, 2023 respectively.

¶35

Malani

¶36

Page 3 of 3

Azeem Azeez Shaikh and Another v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Azeem Azeez Shaikh and Another 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

Xyz Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Swapnil Sanjay Sonawane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Kaisar Siddiqui S/O. Nasiroddin Siddiqui Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ankush Suryabhan Kshirsagar Vs Arjun Devidas Shelke

Janardhan Eknath Nikalaje Vs Sanjay Baburao Torne

Shaikh Rizwan Shaikh Dagdu Vs the State of Maharashtra