CRI. BA 295/2024
1
ORDER
MHCC020021902024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 295 OF 2024
( CNR NO.: MHCC02-002190-2024 )
Asif Abdul Shaikh @ Papa
Aged:- 26 years, Occ:- Service,
Room No.703, R-2C Mhada Colony,
Subhash Nagar, Village Road,
Bhandup (W), Mumbai – 400 078
V/s
The State of Maharashtra
(at the instance of Bhandup
Police station in C.R. No. 24/2024)
…Applicant/Accused
…Respondent/State
Appearance:Ld. Advocate N. V. Sawant for the applicant/accused.
Ld. S. P.P. S.V. Kekanis and 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 : 14.02.2024.
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. 24 of 2024 dated 13.01.2024
CRI. BA 295/2024
2
ORDER
registered with respondent/state for the offences punishable under
Sections 397,506(II), 504 and 323 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 the plea
submissions contentions objections raised by them it inclined the
applicant is arrested on 13.01.2024. Against him the informant
Sureshkumar Ramji Bind raised the accusations that on 13.01.2024 at
00:30 mid night the applicant had travelled from his Auto-Rickshaw
vehicle. Therefore, he has demanded the fare of said travel. However,
the applicant by annoyedly assaulted to informant by stone on account
that he has asked the fare of the travel of his auto-rickshaw and
snatched robbed the cash amount Rs.800/- from his pocket of shirt and
also threatened to kill him. In that regard the submission of applicant is
that he is innocent. However, falsely implicated him in impugned matter
without any reason and cause. Infact in view of allegations grievance
raised no any offence either u/s. 397 of the IPC, 1860 or any other
crime made out or constituted by any manner. He has not used any
weapon in alleged crime. Therefore, material essential required part of
the crime u/s.397 of the IPC, does not comply. However, raised the
CRI. BA 295/2024
3
ORDER
serious in natures crime against him. He also raised general grounds.
5.

The respondent/state has strongly opposed to the bail plea
of applicant principally on the ground that he is habituated to commit
similar in natures severe crimes. Against him in all nine crimes have
been registered and pending. With regard to the impugned crime
involvement participation and attribution of role sufficient evidence is
availed. He is having terror personality in the vicinity of incident of
crime. Thereby, strong possibility of tampering and hampering evidence
and witnesses. After commission of impugned crime he was absconded.
Yet the certain material concern relevant facts circumstance are not
investigated. Thereby, requested to decline the relief sought.
6.

In above circumstance cautiously considered the record
availed raised submissions, grievance contentions prima-facie would
incline against the applicant raised plea accusations that on 13.01.2024
at 00:30 mid night, he had raised the quarrel with informant on account
of giving fare of rickshaw travel. Allegedly he has abused in filthy
language and assaulted to informant by fist blows and kicks as well as
by stone delivered the blow on his right cheek, left eyelid and face.
Whereby seriously got injured him. Moreover, he has also snatched
robbed cash amount Rs.800/- from the pocket of his shirt and
threatened to kill him. The record reveals the informant was seriously
injured and caused injuries grievous in natures. It also reveals against
the applicant in all nine crimes (excluding this crime) have been raised
and pending. All those are similar and serious in natures. With regard to
alleged incident the statement of one of the eye-witnesses is recorded.
However, the certain relevant material facts circumstance are yet to
CRI. BA 295/2024
4
ORDER
investigated interrogated properly and cautiously. Considering the
nature conduct behave demeanour of applicant concern with criminal
antecedents, levelled offences, its seriousness gravity and requirement
of further investigation minutely properly seriously and cautiously I felt
at this juncture certainly the applicant does not deserve to have the
liberty. With this passed the following order.
:ORDER:
1.

The present Criminal Bail Application No.295 of 2024 is hereby
rejected and disposed of accordingly.
2.

The respondent/state to take note of this order.
Dictated and pronounced in open court
Sd/-
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Date of sign
: 14.02.2024
: 15.02.2024
: 17.02.2024
(S.M. Tapkire)
Addl. Sessions Judge
Sessions Court,
Mumbai. C.R. 60
CRI. BA 295/2024
5
ORDER
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”
17/02/2024, 3.06 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
14.02.2024
Order signed by P.O. on
17.02.2024
Order uploaded on
17.02.2024