Allowed

Junaid Nasir Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC23 Feb 2024BA/511/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge granted bail to the applicant charged under multiple IPC sections for assault. The court noted the prolonged trial and lack of framing of charges, finding no substantial risk of flight, and imposed standard reporting and connectivity conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with sureties, subject to conditions of reporting, updating address, surrendering passport, and not interfering with witnesses.

Junaid Nasir Shaikh Vs State of Maharashtra — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

920-BA-511-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶2

2024:BHC-AS:8712

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.511 OF 2024

¶6

Junaid Nasir Shaikh …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra…Respondent

¶7

Mr. Aditya R. Parmar a/w. Mr. Abhijeet Singh, Advocates for the
Applicant.

¶8

Mr. Shriram S. Chaudhari, APP for the Respondent-State.

¶9

CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 23^rd FEBRUARY 2024

¶10

PC:-

¶11

1.Heard Mr. Parmar, learned Counsel appearing for the
Applicant and Mr. Chaudhari, learned APP appearing for the
Respondent-State.

¶12

2. This regular Bail Application is preferred under Section 439

¶13

of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The relevant details are
as follows:-

¶14

`1. C. R. No.`	`592 of 2020`
`2. Date of registration of F.I.R.`	`07/08/2020`
`3. Name of Police Station`	`Loni Kalbhor Police` `Station, Pune`
`4. Section/s invoked`	`307, 427, 143, 147,`
	`148, 149, 504, 506,`

¶15

Page 1 of 6

¶16

920-BA-511-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶17

		`188 of the I.P.C.,` `1860;`
		`4 and 25 of the Arms` `Act,1959;`
		`37(1), (3) r/w. 135` `of the Maharashtra` `Police Act, 1951;`
		`2, 3 and 4 of the` `Epidemic Diseases` `Act, 1897.`
`5.`	`Date of incident`	`06/08/2020`
`6.`	`Date of arrest`	`15/10/2020`

¶18

3.Mr. Parmar, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant
submitted that role attributed to the present Applicant is that he
has assaulted the injured with fist and kick blows. He submitted
that the Applicant was arrested on 15th October 2020 and there is
no further progress in the trial. He submitted that even the charge
is also not framed yet. He further submitted that there are total 7
Accused out of which 1 is absconding and 6 were arrested out of
which 4 have been enlarged on bail. He submitted that the main
accused who is Accused No.1-Pratik Barakade who has assaulted
the injured with a ‘koyta’ has been enlarged on bail.

¶19

Page 2 of 6

¶20

920-BA-511-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶21

4. On the other hand, Mr. Chaudhari, learned APP appearing
for the Respondent-State strongly opposed the Bail Application. He
submitted that the Applicant was absconding and he committed
another offence of murder on 26th September 2020. He submitted
that the Applicant has mercilessly assaulted the injured and
therefore, bail be not granted.

¶22

5.Mr. Parmar, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant
submitted that as far as said other case is concerned, which is inter
alia regarding under Section 302 of the I.P.C., 1860, a learned
Single Judge (Coram: M. S. Karnik, J.) by Order dated 10th October
2023 has allowed the Bail Application No.2955 of 2023 to be
withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh Bail Application after some
time, if trial does not progress substantially. He submitted that
merits of the said case and merits of the present case are totally
different.

¶23

6.Perusal of the record shows that incident in question has
occurred on 6th August 2020, F.I.R. was lodged on 7th August 2020
and the Applicant was arrested on 15th October 2020. Mr. Parmar,
learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant has produced the

¶24

Page 3 of 6

¶25

920-BA-511-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶26

Roznama which shows that even the charge is also not framed yet.
As four Accused are already enlarged on bail and as the Accused
No.1-Pratik Barakade who has assaulted the deceased with a
‘koyta’ has been released on bail and the role attributed to the
Applicant is that he has assaulted the injured with fist and kick
blows, the Applicant is entitled for bail.

¶27

7. The trial is unlikely to conclude any time soon and is likely to take a considerably long time.

¶28

8. The Applicant does not appear to be at risk of flight.

¶29

9. Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by

¶30

imposing conditions. In view thereof, the following order:-

¶31

O R D E R

¶32

(a) The Applicant- Junaid Nasir Shaikh be released on bail in connection with C. R. No.592 of 2020 registered with the Loni Kalbhor Police Station, Taluka-Haveli, District-Pune on his furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solventsureties in the like amount, if not required in other cases.

¶33

Page 4 of 6

¶34

920-BA-511-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶35

(b) On being released on bail, the Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto.

¶36

(c) The Applicant shall report to the Loni Kalbhor Police Station, Taluka-Haveli, District-Pune on the first Sunday of every month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. until the conclusion of the trial.

¶37

(d) 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 such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.

¶38

(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner.

¶39

(f) The Applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The

¶40

Page 5 of 6

¶41

920-BA-511-2024.DOC
Sonali

¶42

Applicant shall co-operate with the Trial Court and
shall not seek unnecessary adjournments thereat.

¶43

(g) The Applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the Investigating Officer.

¶44

10.The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶45

11.It is clarified that the observations made herein are prima
facie and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits
and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

¶46

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶47

Signed by: Sonali Patil Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 23/02/2024 11:33:24

¶48

Page 6 of 6

Junaid Nasir Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Junaid Nasir Shaikh 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

Sandeep Shashikant Patil Vs State of Maharashtra

Rohan Arun Bansode Vs State of Maharashtra

Sanjay Baban Bhapkar Vs State of Maharashtra

Dayalal M. Vaidya vs Kirtikumar Futurmal Jain and Anr.

Ayub Khalid Khatri and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra

Vinod Chandrakant Kadam Vs State of Maharashtra