Irfan Mustafa Landge @ Zaki @ Vicky @ Fahad @ Kabeer Deshmukh @ Kamran @ Salman @ Ashok vs the State of Maharashtra

¶1

skt 85-APEAL-301-2026.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 301 OF 2026

¶5

Digitally signed by SHRADDHA SHRADDHA KAMLESH KAMLESH TALEKAR TALEKAR Date: 2026.04.24 11:13:18 +0530

¶6

Irfan Mustafa Landge @ Zaki @ Vicky @ Fahad @ Kabeer Deshmukh @ Kamran @ Salman @ Ashok Aged about 43 years, Occupation :Service, Resident of Tabarak Allah-Rajnagar, Mukundnagar, Ahmadnagar-414001 … Appellant presently lodged at Mumbai Central Prison (Orig. Accused No. 4)

¶7

V/s.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra (through Anti-Terrorism Squad … Respondent Police Station, Mumbai, C.R. No. 9/2012) (Orig. Complainant)

¶9

Ms. Shifa Khan a/w. Khan Abdul Wahab, for the Appellant. Smt. M.H. Mhatre, APP, for the Respondent-State. ACP Anil Shewale, ATS, Pune.

¶10

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND KAMAL KHATA, JJ. DATE : 16^th April, 2026.

¶11

JUDGMENT (Per A.S. Gadkari, J.) :-

¶12

This is an Appeal under Section 21(4) of National Investigation

¶13

Agency Act, 2008 (for short, “NIA Act”) by the Original Accused No.4, impugning the Order dated 15^th December, 2025, passed below Exh-804, in MCOC Special Case No.7 of 2013, rejecting his application for bail, under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

¶14

1/5

¶15

skt 85-APEAL-301-2026.doc

¶16

1.1) Appellant is original Accused No. 4 in the said MCOC Special Case No. 7 of 2013, which is culmination of investigation of C.R. No.9 of 2012, by the ATS Police Station, Mumbai (originally registered as C.R. No.168 of 2012 with Deccan Police Station Pune), for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 435 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, (IPC) read with Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, read with Sections 3, 25 of the Arms Act, read with Sections 16(1) (b), 18, 20, 23, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 Amendment 2008, read with Sections 3(1) (ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOC Act).

¶17

Heard Ms. Khan, learned Advocate for the Appellant and Smt. Mhatre, learned APP for the Respondent-State. Perused record.

¶18

It is an admitted fact on record that, the Appellant is arrested on 20^th December, 2012 in the present crime and is behind the bars for last more than 13 years and 3 months and 26 days. Record indicates that, the charge against the Appellant has been framed on 23^rd December, 2022. The prosecution has submitted a list of more than 170 witnesses in support of its case. That, as of today the prosecution has examined 63 witnesses and about 107 witnesses are yet to be examined.

¶19

The co-accused, Munib Iqbal Memon (Org. Accused No.5), Farooq Shaukat Bagwan (Org. Accused No.6) and Imran Khan Wajid Khan Pathan (Org. Accused No. 2) have been directed to be released on bail by

¶20

2/5

¶21

skt 85-APEAL-301-2026.doc

¶22

the Judgments dated 20^th September, 2024, 9^th September, 2025 and 13^th February, 2026 respectively, predominantly on the ground of prolonged incarceration without trial. The reasons for their release on bail have been elaborately stated in their respective Judgments and its repetition is avoided for the sake of brevity.

¶23

Perusal of record further clearly indicates that, the Appellant is similarly situated as Farooq Shaukat Bagwan (A. No. 6) and Munib Iqbal Memon (A.No.5) and Imran Khan Wajid Khan Pathan (A. No. 2) on the point of prolonged incarceration without trial and therefore he is entitled to claim parity with the said three accused.

¶24

In view thereof, the Appellant is entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of his trial.

¶25

Hence, the following Order:-

¶26

(i) The impugned Order dated 9^th October, 2025, passed by the learned Special Judge under MCOC Act, City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai below Exhibit-804 in MCOC Special Case No.7 of 2013, is quashed and set aside.

¶27

(ii) Appellant be enlarged on bail, on his executing PR bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or more solvent local sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned Judge, NIA Court.

¶28

(iii) After his release from jail, Appellant shall report to the office of the ATS, Mumbai (Respondent), on the first Saturday of

¶29

3/5

¶30

skt 85-APEAL-301-2026.doc

¶31

every month from 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon, till the conclusion of the trial.

¶32

(iv) Appellant shall not, either himself or through any other person, tamper with the prosecution evidence and give threats or inducement to any of the prosecution witnesses.

¶33

(v) Appellant shall not leave the jurisdiction of districts Mumbai and Pune till the conclusion of the trial, without the prior permission of the NIA Court i.e. the trial Court.

¶34

(vi) Appellant shall surrender his passport, if any, before the NIA Court, before his actual release from jail.

¶35

(vii) Appellant shall inform his latest place of residence and mobile contact number immediately after being released and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time, to the Court seized of the matter and to the Investigating Agency i.e. the Respondent herein.

¶36

(viii) Appellant to co-operate in conducting the trial of present case and attend the trial Court on all dates, unless specifically exempted.

¶37

(ix) Appellant shall file an undertaking with regard to clauses (iii) to (viii) before the trial Court, within two weeks of his release.

¶38

(x) If there is breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the prosecution will be at liberty to seek cancellation of the Appellant's

¶39

4/5

¶40

skt 85-APEAL-301-2026.doc

¶41

bail.

¶42

1. Appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

¶43

1. It is made clear that, the observations made herein are prima

¶44

facie and the learned Special Judge shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this

¶45

judgment.

¶46

All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this

¶47

Judgment.

¶48

(KAMAL KHATA, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

¶49

5/5

Irfan Mustafa Landge @ Zaki @ Vicky @ Fahad @ Kabeer Deshmukh @ Kamran @ Salman @ Ashok v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irfan Mustafa Landge @ Zaki @ Vicky @ Fahad @ Kabeer Deshmukh @ Kamran @ Salman @ Ashok v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bhimabai Baburao Kadam Since Dec Thr Her Legal Heir vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Principal Secretary and Ors.

Shivaji Shaba Kusale and Anr. vs Gavkamgar Talathi Sajja Nimgaon Mhalungi Tal Shirur, Dist. Pune and Ors.

Punjab National Bank through Power of Attorney Rajiv Minhas vs Senior Inspector of Police and Ors.

Hemant Gupta vs the Deputy Registrar , Co-Operative Societies, K/E-Ward

Reenu Rohit Gupta vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Hari Balaji Dangare vs State of Maharashtra