Allowed

Shahnawaj Mansoor Pathan v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC13 Jun 2024ABA/1522/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by the applicant facing offences under IPC Sections 188, 272, 273, 328 and Section 59 of FSSA. Considering pending Supreme Court cases on Section 328 IPC and the overriding nature of FSSA, bail was granted subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; if arrested, the applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a PR Bond of Rs. 50,000 and one surety.

Shahnawaj Mansoor Pathan vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2024)

bipin prithiani

504-aba-1522.24.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1522 OF 2024

¶6

… Shahnawaj Mansoor Pathan Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶7

¶8

Mr. Tushar Sonawane a/w Ms. Pooja Satpute for the Applicant. Mr. Mayur S. Sonavane, APP for Respondent-State.

¶9

¶10

CORAM: MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : 13^th JUNE 2024

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for respondent-State.

¶13

The applicant has approached this Court apprehending arrest in connection with FIR No. 0105 of 2024 dated 13^th April 2024, registered with MIDC Police Station, Sangli, for offence under Sections 188, 272, 273, 328 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (FSSA).

¶14

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that insofar as Section 328 of the IPC is concerned, in a series of cases pending before the Supreme Court interim protection has been granted, as the issue as to whether in such circumstances Section 328 of the IPC can be invoked at all is pending consideration. The offences

bipin prithiani

504-aba-1522.24.doc

under Sections 188, 272 and 273 of the IPC all are bailable and the only other offence registered against the applicant is under Section 59 of the FSSA. As regards the provisions of FSSA, reliance is placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Ram Nath v/s. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. , 2024 SCC OnLine SC 177 , particularly, paragraphs 25 to 27 thereof, to indicate that the provisions of FSSA override the provisions of the IPC.

¶19

On this basis, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that this Court may consider granting anticipatory bail to the applicant, as he undertakes to cooperate with the investigation.

¶20

The learned APP appearing for the respondent-State, opposes the prayer made in the present application, submitting that the investigation is at a nascent stage as the FIR has been registered recently on 13^th April 2024.

¶21

The judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ram Nath v/s. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (supra) clearly lays down the proposition that the provisions of FSSA override the provisions of Sections 272 and 273 of the IPC. The offence under Sections 188, 272 and 273 of the IPC are bailable, which leave only the offence under Section 328 of the IPC.

¶22

The learned APP also does not dispute the fact that a number of cases are pending before the Supreme Court on the

bipin prithiani

504-aba-1522.24.doc

question, as to whether Section 328 of the IPC can at all be invoked in such cases concerning procurement and sale of Gutka In all such cases, the Supreme Court has granted interim protection to the accused persons. This Court is informed that hearing in the said cases is part-heard and the next date of hearing before the Supreme Court is 15^th July 2024.

¶27

Considering the aforesaid material, this Court is of the opinion that the present application can be allowed, subject to appropriate conditions.

¶28

In view of the above, the application is allowed in the following terms :

¶29

(a) In the event the applicant is arrested in connection with FIR No. 0105 of 2024 dated 13^th April 2024, registered with MIDC Police Station, Sangli, he shall be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond of Rs.50,000/and one surety in the like amount.

¶30

(b) The applicant shall remain present before the Investigating Officer on 20^th and 21^st June 2024 between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. and thereafter, as and when required, till filing of the charge-sheet. The applicant shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation.

bipin prithiani

504-aba-1522.24.doc

(c) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner. He shall not influence the informant, witnesses or any other person concerned with the case.

¶35

Needless to say, violation of any of the aforesaid conditions would make the applicant liable to face proceedings for cancellation of anticipatory bail. It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the question of grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant in the present application and that the trial Court shall proceed further, without being influenced by the observations made in this order.

¶36

The application is disposed of.

¶37

MANISH PITALE, J.

¶38

BIPIN DHARMENDER Digitally signed by BIPIN DHARMENDERPRITHIANI PRITHIANI Date: 2024.06.13 18:42:20 +0530

Shahnawaj Mansoor Pathan v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahnawaj Mansoor Pathan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shankar Singh Jalamsingh Kharvat vs State of Maharashtra

Abdul Sarvar Husain Salmani vs State of Maharashtra

Parvej Dastagir Sheikh vs the State of Maharashtra

Metropolis Healthcare Limited vs Mylab Discovery Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

Sadashiv @ Mehul Pandey and Anr. vs Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.

Prabhakar Govind Kurane vs the State of Maharashtra