Allowed

Aslam@Sandy Ikrar Ansari v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC12 Sept 2023IA/238/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In bail application by a convicted appellant, the High Court suspended the applicant's sentence and enlarged him on bail pending the disposal of his criminal appeal, noting parity with a co-accound who was similarly granted relief and lack of specific incriminating deposition against him by witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Sentence suspended and applicant enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000 along with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to specified conditions of reporting and address infor

Aslam@Sandy Ikrar Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr. — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

2023:BHC-AS:27086-DB

¶2

5-IA-238-2020.doc

¶3

rrpillai

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 238 OF 2020

¶6

IN

¶7

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.212 OF 2019

¶8

Aslam @ Sandy Ikrar Ansari...Applicant

¶9

 Versus

¶10

State of Maharashtra and Another...Respondents

¶11

Mr. Amit Icham a/w. Mr. Aniket Nikam and Mr. Aashish Satpute for
the Applicant.

¶12

Ms. P. P. Shinde, APP for the State.

¶13

Mr. Lokesh Zade a/w. Mr Asif Shaikh, Appointed for Respondent
no. 2

¶14

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &
 GAURI GODSE, JJ.

¶15

 DATE : 12th SEPTEMBER 2023

¶16

P. C. :

¶17

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶18

2. By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of his sentence and enlargement on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of his aforesaid appeal.

¶19

1/6

¶20

5-IA-238-2020.doc

¶21

The applicant vide judgment and order dated 2^nd November 2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No. 790 of 2012 has been convicted alongwith other co-accused as under:

¶22

—for the offence punishable u/s. 143 of the Indian Penal
code, to suffer R.I. for three months and pay fine of
Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer R.I. for eight days;

¶23

—for the offence punishable u/s. 148 of the Indian Penal
code, to suffer R.I. for one year and pay fine of Rs.1000/-,
in default, to suffer R.I. for fifteen days;

¶24

—for the offence punishable u/s. 147 of the Indian Penal
code, no separate sentence is awarded;

¶25

—for the offence punishable u/s. 326 r/w. 149 of the Indian
Penal code, to suffer R.I. for five years and pay fine of
Rs.5000/-, in default, to suffer R.I. for one month;

¶26

—for the offence punishable u/s. 302 r/w. 149 of the Indian
Penal code, to suffer R.I. of life imprisonment and pay fine
of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to suffer R.I. for three months.

¶27

2/6

¶28

5-IA-238-2020.doc

¶29

All sentences were directed to run concurrently.

¶30

At the outset, we may note, that the applicant seeks suspension of his sentence and enlargement on bail, on the ground of parity with other co-accused i.e. Yashir Majid Shaikh (Original accused no.4), whose sentence has been suspended and who is enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 19^th December 2019 in Application No. 24 of 2019 in Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 2019

¶31

5.Learned counsel for the applicant also submits that the
applicant has been in prison for the last nine years, with no
prospect of his appeal being heard in the immediate near future.

¶32

Perused the papers. It appears that there are four eye witnesses to the alleged incident of assault on deceased – Ismail Sharif Shaikh which took place on 29^th April 2012 at about 7.30 pm to 8.00 pm.

¶33

7.As far as PW-1- Jahed Mohammad Sayyad, Original
complainant and an eye witness to the alleged incident is

¶34

3/6

¶35

5-IA-238-2020.doc

¶36

concerned, he has not named the applicant as being one of the
assailants.

¶37

8.As far as PW-2 – Abdul Kadar, son of PW-8 (Bibi Badasha
Shaikh) is concerned, he has stated that the applicant, Yashir
Majid Shaikh (who has been enlarged on bail) and other accused
were armed with weapons and assaulted the deceased. The role
ascribed to the applicant is similar to that of Yashir Majid Shaikh
who has been enlarged on bail. It is pertinent to note, that PW-2
in his statement before the Magistrate has not named the
applicant as being one of the assailants.

¶38

9.As far as PW-8 –(Bibi Badasha Shaikh-mother of PW-2 and
as injured eye witness) is concerned, she does not specifically
name the applicant in her deposition, however identifies the
applicant, as being friend of one of the accused. It is pertinent to
note that she does not speak about the presence of PW-2 (Abdul
Javed Badshah Shaikh) at the time of the alleged incident.

¶39

10. As far as PW-9 Akbar Ali Badha Shaikh is concerned, the role attributed by him to the applicant, is identical to that of co-

¶40

4/6

¶41

5-IA-238-2020.doc

¶42

accused Yashir Majid Shaikh who has been released on bail by this
Court i.e. all accused persons were armed with weapons and
assaulted the deceased.

¶43

11.Admittedly, there is no recovery of any weapons at the
instance of the applicant. It is not disputed by the learned counsel
for the respondents that the role of the applicant is similar to that
of Yashir Majid Shaikh who has been enlarged on bail. Apart from
the aforesaid evidence on record, the applicant is in custody for
the last nine years.

¶44

12.Considering the aforesaid, application is allowed and the
applicant’s sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail on
the following terms and conditions :

¶45

ORDER

¶46

(i)The applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond
in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like
amount;

¶47

5/6

¶48

5-IA-238-2020.doc

¶49

(ii)The applicant shall report to the trial Court, once in three
months on the day/date specified by the trial Court, till the appeal
is finally disposed of;

¶50

(iii)The applicant shall keep the trial Court informed of his
current address and mobile contact number and/or change of
residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time;

¶51

(iv)If there are two consecutive defaults in appearing before the
trial Court, the learned Judge shall make a report to the High
Court and the prosecution would be at liberty to file an
application seeking cancellation of bail.

¶52

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

¶53

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

¶54

GAURI GODSE, J.

¶55

 REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶56

6/6

Aslam@Sandy Ikrar Ansari v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aslam@Sandy Ikrar Ansari v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Sunil Ankush Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Jaylaxmi Vijaykumar Gurav Vs State of Maharashtra

Ganpat Vanchaji Dolas Vs State of Maharashtra

Shrawan Bhaurao Dude Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gaurav Kumar Murarka Vs Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli Silvassa and Ors.

Ramesh Satpal Nagpal and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.