Allowed

Javed Mohd Idris Ansari v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Sept 2023BA/2245/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the High Court of Bombay granted bail to the accused in a section 307 IPC case, noting complete investigation, discharge of the victim, and detention over two years, directing monthly reporting.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 67 of 2021 on executing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties and complying with reporting conditions.

Javed Mohd Idris Ansari Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

29-BA-2245-22.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2245 OF 2022

¶5

Javed Mohd. Idris Ansari

¶6

…Applicant

¶7

V/s.

¶8

State of Maharashtra…Respondent

¶9

Mr. Salman Khan, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. Y. Y. Dabke, APP for Respondent-State.

¶10

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

¶11

DATE : 25th SEPTEMBER 2023

¶12

P. C:-

¶13

1. By this Application, Applicant is seeking bail in C.R.No. 67 of 2021 registered with Shanti Nagar Police Station, Bhiwandi for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”).

¶14

2. It is the prosecution’s case that on 31.01.2021 Applicant and co-accused assaulted first informant and his brother with knife with intention to kill them.

¶15

3. It is the contention of learned Counsel for the Applicant that Applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Cross complaint

¶16

S.S.Kilaje page 1 of 4

¶17

29-BA-2245-22.doc

¶18

is filed by the Applicant against the complainant and his brother.
No motive assigned to Applicant for participating in the alleged act
of attempt to murder. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet
has been filed. The first informant was discharged from hospital
after four days. Applicant is behind the bar more than two years.
Hence, requested to allow the Application.

¶19

4.It is the contention of learned APP that Applicant had
assaulted the first informant and his brother with knife on their
chest and vital part of the body. Injuries caused to the first
informant and his brother were grievous injuries and they were on
vital part of the body, the knife used in the crime is recovered at the
instance of the Applicant. It shows his involvement in the crime. If
Applicant is released on bail he may threaten prosecution witnesses.
Hence, requested to reject the Application.

¶20

5.I have heard both the learned Counsel. Perused FIR and
charge-sheet. The medical papers shows injuries caused to first
informant were grievous injuries. First informant was discharged
from the hospital after four days. Investigation is completed and
charge-sheet has been filed. Applicant is behind the bar more than
2 years. Considering the above facts further detention of Applicant

¶21

S.S.Kilaje page 2 of 4

¶22

29-BA-2245-22.doc

¶23

is not required. Charge has not been framed, it may take time to
conclude the trial, in view of the above, I pass following Order:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

(i) Applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 67 of 2021
registered with Shanti Nagar Police Station, Bhiwandi
on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with
one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶26

(ii) Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station once in a month i.e. on first Monday of the month between 11.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. till framing of charge.

¶27

(iii) Applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and mobile number immediately after being released and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Investigating Officer.

¶28

(iv) Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

¶29

(v) The Trial Court shall decide the said case on its own

¶30

merits, in accordance with law uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶31

S.S.Kilaje page 3 of 4

¶32

29-BA-2245-22.doc

¶33

6. The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶34

7. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶35

 (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

¶36

SONALI Digitally signedby SONALISATISH KILAJE SATISHKILAJE Date:2023.09.2714:43:28+0530

¶37

S.S.Kilaje page 4 of 4

Javed Mohd Idris Ansari v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Javed Mohd Idris Ansari 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

Vakil Atik Ahmed Attarwala Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vakil Atik Ahmed Attarwala Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anwar Iqbal Hussain Sayed Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohd. Fakiyan Ayyub Khan Vs State of Maharashtra

Aafroz Faiyaz Ali Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vivek Ramesh Shewale Vs State of Maharashtra