This dismissal order rejects a bail application under Cr.P.C. Section 439. The High Court held that the gravity of the murder charge and the risk of threatening witnesses precluded bail.
Bail application dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Megha
41_ba_102_2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.102 OF 2023
Mohabbatali Anwarali Khan @ ...Applicant
Chinku
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr. Mateen Shaikh with Ms Muskan Shaikh for the Applicant.
Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Ahire, PSI, MIDC Police Station, Mumbai, present.
CORAM: SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.
DATED : 29th MARCH, 2023.
P. C. :-
1.This is an application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. filed
by the aforesaid Applicant, who is facing trial in Sessions Case No.173
of 2017 pending on the file of learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Dindoshi. Said case arises out of C.R. No.48 of 2017 registered with
MIDC Police Station, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under
Sections 120-B, 143, 144, 147, 148, 302, 307, 326, 342 and 506(2) r/
w 149 of the IPC.
2.Heard Mr. Mateen Shaikh, learned counsel for the Applicant
and Mr. S.V. Gavand, learned APP for the Respondent -State. I have
1/4
Megha 41_ba_102_2023.doc
perused the records and considered the submissions advanced by the
learned counsel for the respective parties.
3.The aforesaid crime was registered pursuant to the FIR
lodged by Abdul Mohsin Shaikh. The facts narrated in the FIR prima
facie disclose that the Complainant is a police informant. He came to
know that one Sohrab was wanted by the police in a theft case. On
31/01/2017 the Complainant and his brother Vasi Ullah met Mr.
Rakesh Pawar, one of the police officers and gave him information
about said Sohrab. The said police officer called a relative of Sohrab to
the police station, who assured the police that he would assist them in
nabbing said Sohrab.
4.On 03/02/2017 said Sohrab called Vasi Ullah, brother of
the Complainant at Bhangarwadi. Accordingly the Complainant, Vasi
Ullah and one of the villagers-Shamsuddin, went to Bhangarwadi. The
Applicant and the co-accused were present at Bhangarwadi. They
requested the Complainant not to give information to the police about
Sohrab. Thereafter the Applicant and the co-accused took them to one
gala to have meal. When they entered the gala, the Applicant and
others surrounded them and assaulted them with iron pipes and rods.
2/4
Megha 41_ba_102_2023.doc
They also prevented the onlookers and the neighbours from
intervening or helping them. Thereafter the Applicant and the co-
accused dragged them and threw them out of the gala. The Applicant
and others threatened the onlookers not to take the injured to the
hospital and to help them in any manner. The neighbours shut their
galas due to fear and refused to help them and take them to the
hospital. At about 3.30 p.m. a police van came to the place of the
incident and took the injured to the hospital. The brother of the
Complainant-Vasi Ullah, who had sustained grievous injury succumbed
to the injuries on the same day at about 06.15 p.m.
5.The statements of the Complainant as well as other injured
persons prima facie reveal that the Applicant was involved in causing
death of Vasi Ullah. The post mortem report reveals that said Vasi
Ullah had sustained as many as 10 injuries and the doctor has opined
that the death was due to shock and hemorrhage due to multiple
injuries. The medical records also indicate that the Complainant
herein had also suffered three grievous injuries. The records prima
facie reveal that the incident was preplanned. Furthermore, the
Applicant was not only involved in assaulting the Complainant and
causing death of his brother Vasi Ullah but they had also prevented
3/4
Megha 41_ba_102_2023.doc
other onlookers and neighbours/gala owners from helping the
Complainant and threatened them with dire consequences. The gravity
of the offence does not justify grant of bail. Considering the fact
situation, the possibility of the Applicant threatening the Complainant
and other witnesses cannot be ruled out. Hence, the bail application is
dismissed.
(SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)
Digitally signed MEGHA by MEGHA SPARAB S Date: 2023.04.05 PARAB 10:36:19 +0530
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail can be granted to an accused facing charges for murder and conspiracy resulting in death.
Whether the gravity of the offence and threat to witnesses justify rejecting bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohabbatali Anwarali Khan @ Chinku
The State of Maharashtra
Anuja Prabhudesai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court