Disposed¶24

Sakala Shamisho Sakhila Syidni and Another v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC12 Aug 2025BA/368/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail Application No. 368 of 2025, High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench, Arun R. Pedneker J., decided 12.08.2025. Prolonged pre-trial incarceration of about 4½ years; Crime No.0012/2021, Vajirabad Police Station, District Nanded; offences under Ss. 467, 468, 469, 471, 420, 120(B) IPC and Ss. 43, 66, 66(C), 66(D) IT Act, 2000; earlier bail application dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 25.01.2024 as withdrawn; charge framed 09.08.2021, trial not concluded within 60 days, Section 437(6) Cr.P.C. pointed out; co-accused absconding; bail granted on terms and conditions of trial court.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to both applicants, on terms and conditions to be imposed by the trial court, with the applicants to remain available for trial. ¶24

Sakala Shamisho Sakhila Syidni and Another Vs the State… — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

2025:BHC-AUG:21912

¶2

925

¶3

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

925 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 368 OF 2025

¶6

SAKALA SHAMISHO S/O. SAKHILA SYIDNI

¶7

IMRAN S/O. USMAN SHOYABU / SHUAIBU

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶10

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Bipinchandra K. Patil APP for Respondent/State: Mrs. V. N. Patil Jadhav

¶11

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. DATE : 12.08.2025

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

1] Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned APP for the respondent-State.

¶14

2] The applicants are seeking bail as they were arrested on 28.01.2021 & 18.02.2021 respectively in connection with Crime No.0012/2021, dated 11.01.2021, registered with Vajirabad Police Station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 469, 471, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 & under Sections 43, 66, 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

¶15

3] Last bail application was rejected by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 25.01.2024. The learned counsel submits that the applicants are charged with Sections 420, 467, 468, 469, 471, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 & under

¶16

¶17

925

¶18

Sections 43, 66, 66(C), 66(D) of the Information Technology Act. He submits that the applicants are behind the bars for about 4 ½ years and it is not known within how much time the trial would be concluded and there may be no possibility of the trial being concluded in near future and as some of the accused are absconding and they are not traceable and the trial is held up. So also, the learned counsel pointed out Section 437(6) of the Cr.P.C. He submits that the trial has commenced before the Magistrate and charge is framed on 09.08.2021 and the the first date of recording evidence is 21.08.2021 and the trial is not concluded within 60 days as required.

¶19

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has dismissed the bail application on 25.01.2024 as withdrawn after the court had expressed disinclination to grant bail. However, the period of 1 ½ years is passed by and there is no progress in the trial as other accused are absconding.

¶20

4] Considering that the applicants are behind the bars for 4½ years, the applicants are granted bail. The applicants shall ensure that they remain available for trial.

¶21

5] Bail is granted to the applicants, on such terms and conditions that would be imposed by the trial court. Bail before the trial court. The trial court may impose necessary conditions so that the applicants would be available for the trial.

¶22

¶23

925

¶24

6] The Bail Application stands disposed of

¶25

accordingly.

¶26

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE

¶27

marathe