Allowed

Tanveer Mohammad Hanif Rangrej v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC27 Mar 2023BA/319/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court of Justice at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad allowed the bail petition of Tanveer Mohammad Hanif Rangrej. The court weighed the applicant's presence in the car versus the lack of assault or weapon usage, distinguishing him from an organized syndicate member.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; Applicant released on bail by furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs. 50,000/- with one solvent surety of the like amount.

Tanveer Mohammad Hanif Rangrej Vs the State of Maharashtra — Corruption | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

31-BA-319-23.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.319 OF 2023

¶5

TANVEER MOHAMMAD HANIF RANGREJ
VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶7

...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. M. R. Malpani
APP for Respondent: Mr. K. S. Patil

¶8

CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.

¶9

DATE : 27.03.2023

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P for

¶12

the respondent-State.

¶13

2.The learned counsel for the applicant would submit that as per
the statement of the first informant and the injured bare presence of
the applicant was shown in the car. The conversation between him
and co-accused Ravindra Gondkar indicates that the applicant was
trying to patch up the dispute over the shop. He had been there to
settle the dispute which was not so important. There are no
allegations against him that he assaulted the injured. He did not
involve in the present crime. The antecedents to his discredit would
not come in his way for bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since

¶14

¶15

31-BA-319-23.odt

¶16

so many months. The charge sheet has been filed. The trial would
take its time. The applicant is ready to abide by terms and conditions,
if enlarged on bail.

¶17

3.The learned A.P.P. opposed the application. He would argue that
the offence is apparently serious. It was committed by the organized
syndicate. The applicant was involved in the similar crimes. The
offence is serious. The applicant has created terror in the locality.
Therefore, he may not be granted bail.

¶18

4.Perused the papers. The F.I.R is specific that the applicant was
present there in the car, however, he did not assault. The telephonic
conversation between the applicant and co-accused Ravindra support
the contention of the applicant that he was trying to patch up the
dispute between the first informant and two others. In these
circumstances, it would be difficult to accept at this juncture that he
was a member of the organized syndicate. No weapon has been
allegedly used by him. Therefore, he may be granted bail on certain
conditions. Hence, the following order :-

¶19

ORDER

¶20

(i) Application is allowed.

¶21

¶22

31-BA-319-23.odt

¶23

(ii)Applicant Tanveer Mohammad Hanif Rangrej be released on bail
on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
only) with one solvent surety of the like amount, in Crime No. 394 of
2021 registered with Shirdi Police Station District Ahmednagar, for the
offences punishable under sections 307, 109, 120B, 201, 212, 506
read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3/25, 7/25,
and 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the
Maharashtra Control of Organized Crimes Act 1999 on the following

¶24

conditions :

¶25

(a) He shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

¶26

(b) He shall attend the trial on each and every date.

¶27

(c) He shall attend the police station on second Saturday of each month between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m till the conclusion of the trial.

¶28

(d) He shall not leave the place of his residence without intimation to the concerned police station till conclusion of the trial.

¶29

( S. G. MEHARE )
 JUDGE

¶30

ysk

Tanveer Mohammad Hanif Rangrej v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tanveer Mohammad Hanif Rangrej 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

Purushottam Tukarma Surnar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Laxman @ Raju Namdeo Paul Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rameshwar Janglya Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vishal @ Kali Dilip Suryawanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anil Govindrao Wadhave Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vicky @ Balu Shivaji Waghmare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another