Allowed

Aurangzeb @Sheru Tahir Khan v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC27 Mar 2024BA/1270/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) granted bail to the applicant, who was arraigned under sections 307 IPC and the Indian Arms Act. The court found no prima facie material connecting him to the crime at the bail stage despite a witness statement and CCTV panchanama.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a PR bond of Rs. 30,000/- and two sureties in the same amount; conditions of reporting and abstinence from tampering with evidence imposed.

Aurangzeb @Sheru Tahir Khan Vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AS:14998

¶2

915 ba 1270 of 2024.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1270 OF 2024

¶4

... Aurangzeb @ Sheru Tahir Khan Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶5

Mr. Husen Shaikh with Mr. Rumman Shaikh, for Applicant. Mr. Prashant Jadhav, APP for State. Mr. Dnayndev Bhivaji Kolekar, PSI, Byculla Police Station present.

¶6

CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J. DATE : 27 MARCH 2024

¶7

P.C.

¶8

Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

¶9

The Applicant who is arraigned in C.R.No.573 of 2023 registered with

¶10

Byculla Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 307 read with Section 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 5 of the Indian Arms Act, has preferred this application to enlarged him on bail.

¶11

The first informant lodged a report with the allegations that on 18 November 2022 on the night intervening 17^th and 18^th November 2023 at about 3.00 a.m., while the first informant and his friends were sitting in front of Welcome Dresses, Mazgaon, two unknown persons came thereat riding a motorcycle. The pillion rider was wearing a mask. The pillion rider took out a pistol from his waist and aimed it at the first informant and his friends. As the first informant and his friends started to run away, the pillion rider fired at them. The bullet stuck the concrete block

¶12

SSP 1/4

¶13

915 ba 1270 of 2024.doc on the steps to the said shop. The first informant sustained laceration on the third toe of right feet. Those unknown persons fled away towards Mustafa Bazar.

¶14

During the course of investigation, it transpired that at the instance of Nisar Ahmed Shaikh @ Papu, the absconding accused, accused No.1 Imran @ Babu and Accused No.3 Ahmed Shaikh had fired at the first informant and his friend. Accused No.3 was the assailant and the accused No.1 was riding the motorcycle. It further transpired that the firearm was supplied by the applicant. Thus, the applicant came to be arrested on 22 November 2023.

¶15

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that after more than two months of the occurrence, statement of one Mohd. Ramzan was recorded, wherein the said witness stated that the said witness had seen the applicant handing over a white bag to an unknown person on 17 November 2023 at 1.00 p.m. The prosecution alleges that the said packet contained a pistol by means of which the accused No.3 fired at the first informant and his friend. It was submitted that apart from the said statement, there is no material to connect the applicant with the crime.

¶16

Learned APP, on the other hand, resisted the prayer for bail. It was submitted that the statement of Mohd. Ramzan incriminates the applicant. In addition, there is a panchanama of CCTV footage which shows that on 17 November 2023, the applicant was pillion riding the motorcycle driven by accused No.3 Ahmed @ Munna.

¶17

SSP 2/4

¶18

915 ba 1270 of 2024.doc

¶19

1. Prima facie, none of the aforesaid circumstances pressed into service on

¶20

behalf of the prosecution, namely, the statement of Mohd. Ramzan and the panchanama of the CCTV footage indicates that the applicant had delivered the weapon of offence to the accused No.3. Prima facie, the matter appears to be in the realm of surmises and conjunctures. Evidently, the persons who had fired at the first informant and his friends were unknown to them. Even in the disclosure statement allegedly made by the assailant, the name of the applicant is not disclosed as a supplier of the weapon.

¶21

In the aforesaid view of the matter, at this stage, there does not appear to be any material to prima facie connect the applicant with the crime.

¶22

Learned APP submitted that the applicant has antecedents.

¶23

Even if it is assumed that the applicant has antecedents, in the absence of

¶24

any incriminating material in the case at hand, the applicant cannot be deprived of his liberty on the count of criminal antecedents alone. I am, therefore, inclined to exercise discretion in favouor of the applicant.

¶25

Hence, the following order :

¶26

ORDER

¶27

(i) The Application stands allowed.

¶28

(ii) The Applicant – Aurangzeb @ Sheru Tahir Khan be released on bail in

¶29

C.R.No.573 of 2023 registered with Byculla Police Station on furnishing a PR bond in

¶30

SSP 3/4

¶31

915 ba 1270 of 2024.doc the sum of Rs.30,000/- and one or two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

¶32

(iii) The applicant shall mark his presence before Byculla Police Station on first Monday of every alternate month between 11 am to 1 pm for a period of three years or till the conclusion of the trial, whichever is earlier.

¶33

(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any police officer.

¶34

(v) On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number

¶35

and residential address to the investigating officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.

¶36

(vi) The applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court.

¶37

(vii) By way of abundant caution, it is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are confined for the purpose of determination of the entitlement for bail and they may not be construed as an expression of opinion on the guilt or otherwise of

¶38

the applicant and the trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove.

¶39

( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )

¶40

SSP 4/4

¶41

Signed by: S.S.Phadke Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 29/03/2024 11:13:10

Aurangzeb @Sheru Tahir Khan v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aurangzeb @Sheru Tahir Khan v. 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

Mahesh @ Mayur Ghone Vs State of Maharashtra

Dinesh Ganesh Indre Vs State of Maharashtra

Shri Prof. Sadashiv Sakharam Patil Vs Vandana Sadashiv Patil and Ors.

Gautam Ganesh Wankhede vs State of Maharashtra

Aakash Satish Pandey Vs the State of Maharashtra

Tabrez Zakir Jafari Vs State of Maharashtra