Abdul Wahab Mohammad Hussain Vs State of Maharashtra Bombay Sessions Court Criminal Bail Application No 577 of 2024

CRI. BA 577/2024
1
ORDER
MHCC020037672024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 577 OF 2024
( CNR NO.: MHCC02-003767-2024 )
ABDUL WAHAB MOHAMMAD HUSSAIN
Age:- 56 years, Occ.:- Labour
Address:- Behind Water Tank,
Room No. 55, 10/14,
Himalaya Soc., Anandgad,
Park Site, Vikhroli (West),
Mumbai, Maharashtra-400079.
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of Parksite
Police Station vide C.R.No.611/2023)
…Applicant/Accused
…Respondent/State.

Appearance:Ld. Advocate Ibraheem K.M. for the applicant/accused.
Ld. S.P.P Manisha J. Parmar for the State/respondent.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
S.M. TAPKIRE (C.R.60)
DATE : 12.03.2024.

CRI. BA 577/2024
2
ORDER
ORDER
1.

This is an application under Section 439 of Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C) in
connection with the crime vide C.R. No. 611 of 2023 dated 03.10.2023
registered with respondent/state for the offences punishable under
Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2.
of
The respondent/state has strongly opposed to the bail plea
the
applicant on various
grounds
by
filing
their
written
say/submission at Exh-3.
3.

Perused the application, plea submissions, grounds raised
therein coupled with the documents placed reliance by the applicant.
Also, perused the written say/objection of respondent/state. Heard Ld.
Advocate for the applicant and the Ld. S.P.P. for respondent/state.
4.

Having heard to the rival parties and considered their
raised submissions contentions record availed prima-facie inclined in
impugned crime the applicant alone is involved. Against him the
informant Mrs. Tayyaba Abdul Rashid Shaikh raised the plea allegation
that the applicant has belonged a Room No.B-55, 11/14, Nanumiya
Chawl, Anandgad, Parksite, Vikhroli (West), Mumbai (hereinafter
referred to as said Room). The applicant was in need of Rs.3,30,000/-.
Due to that he has executed the agreement of said room by accepting
heavy deposit amount from her. Though he was assured that after the
said agreement, he will give monthly rent amount of said room to her.
However, he has malafidely dishonestly again executed agreements in
CRI. BA 577/2024
3
ORDER
favour of Jakhiya Shaikh, Farzana Amdule and Majar Khan and by that
accepted huge amount from them. Thereby, the applicant has
unlawfully grabbed in all Rs.12,80,000/- by giving false ultra-vires
promises assurance to everyone. The pre-arrest bail plea of applicant is
pleased to rejected by this court. Even the pre-arrest bail plea raised by
him before Hon’ble High Court of Judicature At Bombay by ABA
No.3097 of 2023 is also dismissed. Thereon, he is arrested on
23.02.2024. His bail plea is pleased to rejected by the Ld. Trial Court.
Thereby, raised the impugned bail plea for having liberty on relying the
reasons grounds that he is innocent and falsely implicated to him. In
fact there was transaction of finance for business. However, the same
could not complied by him. Thereby, the same certainly comes under
the purview of civil litigation. However, colour of criminality given
falsely. He also raised general grounds.
5.

The respondent/state has vehemently opposed to the bail
plea of applicant principally on the ground the Ld. Trial Court has
rightly rejected his bail plea. The demeanour behave modus conduct of
applicant to commit similar in natures economic crime repeatedly
required to be considered judiciously. He has grabbed misappropriated
in all Rs.12,80,000/- from the poor persons by giving false dubious
promises assurance to pay monthly rent to them by executing
agreements in their favour of his said room. However, later on the said
room alienated to other. In that regard sufficient documentary evidence
material is availed. The investigation is yet not completed. He is
habituated to commit similar in natures crime. Thereby, doesn’t deserve
to have liberty. They also raised general objections.

CRI. BA 577/2024
6.

4
ORDER
In the above circumstance considering the entire record
material availed raised submissions contentions objections it inclined
against the applicant alleged that he has given false assurance promises
to informant and other victims in regard to availing monthly rent
amount of his room by accepting heavy deposits amount. Moreover, in
that regard he has made executed agreement in favour of informant and
others. Allegedly he has accepted Rs.12,80,000/- from them and lateron
resiled from his promise assurance to disburse the monthly rent amount
to them. Considering the same and in that regard documents availed
whereby prima-facie clearly inclined about fraudulent dishonest
intention of applicant by route to deceived cheated them and grabbed
misappropriated the accepted amount. In that regard sufficient
documentary evidence is availed. His bail plea is rejected by the Ld.
Trial Court. The material objection of respondent that the material
relevant facts circumstances are yet to detected and investigated. Thus,
considering the same and especially the levelled allegations, availed
evidence, modus, conduct behave of applicant to commit the crime,
whereby, I felt every material relevant concern fact circumstance
required to be investigated properly cautiously. In the circumstance
certainly he does not deserve to have the liberty. With this passed the
following order.
:ORDER:
1.

The present Criminal Bail Application No. 577 of 2024 is hereby
rejected and disposed of accordingly.

CRI. BA 577/2024
2.

5
ORDER
The respondent/state to take the note of this order.
Dictated and pronounced in open court
Sd/(S.M. Tapkire)
Addl. Sessions Judge
Sessions Court,
Mumbai. C.R. 60
Dictated on
: 12.03.2024
Directly typed on : 12.03.2024
Date of sign
: 12.03.2024
CRI. BA 577/2024
6
ORDER
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
12/03/2024, 5.36 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
Mr. Prasad S. Pednekar
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (with Court Room No.)

HHJ S.M. Tapkire,(C.R.No.60)
Addl. Sessions Judge.,City Civil & Sessions
Court, Mumbai.

Date of pronouncement of Judgment/Order
12.03.2024
Order signed by P.O. on
12.03.2024
Order uploaded on
12.03.2024