1
B.A. 97/24
MHCC020006442024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No.97 OF 2024
Ibrahim Naeem Khan
Age 41 years, Occ : Worker,
Residing at R.No.18,
Bhagat Niwas, Mumbai Pune Road,
Opp. Municipal Hospital,
Mira Road, Thane (E),
… Applicant
– Versus The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Kurla
Railway Police Station
vide CR. No.1688/2023
… Respondent
Appearance :Advocate Smita Pawar for the applicant.
APP Iqbal Solkar for the respondent / State
CORAM : RAJESH A. SASNE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 17/01/2024
ORDER
This is second bail application of the accused filed
u/sec.439 of Criminal Procedure Code for releasing him on bail in
connection with C.R.No.1688/2023 registered with Kurla Railway
Police Station for the commission of offences punishable u/sec.379, 34
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 147 of Indian Railway Act.

2
2.

B.A. 97/24
It is the contention of the applicant / accused that he is
innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. The accused is
arrested on 12.10.2023. He has undergone custodial interrogation. The
applicant is the earning member of the family. He has no criminal
antecedents. Therefore, there is no point in keeping the accused behind
bars. He is permanent resident of his given address therefore applicant /
accused prayed for releasing him on bail.
3.

The prosecution opposed the application by filing reply
vide Exh.2. If accused is released on bail there are chances of flee away
from justice. If accused is released on bail there are chances of
threatening of prosecution witnesses and tampering of prosecution
evidence. Hence, prosecution prayed for rejection of the application.
4.

Read the application, say filed by the prosecution. Heard
the ld. Advocate for the applicant, ld. APP for the respondent / State.
5.

The previous bail application of the applicant / accused has
been rejected as the accused is habitual offender and convicted in nine
cases of similar nature. The prosecution in their reply have provided
details about the cases pending and the cases in which the present
applicant / accused has been convicted. Four more cases of like nature
are pending against the accused. The ld Metropolitan Magistrate in his
order also held that the accused is repeated offender and in habit of
indulge into criminal activities. The accused has criminal antecedents.
He is convicted accused in like nature offences. If he released on bail, he
will commit same type of offences in near future. He will tamper with
the prosecution evidence. He will flee away from the justice. There are
no change of circumstances. Hence, applicant / accused is not entitled
3
B.A. 97/24
to be released on bail. In the result I pass the following order :
ORDER
Criminal Bail Application No.97 of 2024 is rejected and disposed off
accordingly.
Date : 17/01/2024
Dictated on
: 17.01.2024
Transcribed on
: 18.01.2024
Signed by HHJ on : 19.01.2024
( RAJESH A. SASNE )
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.

4
B.A. 97/24
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
ORDER.”
19/01/2024
5.35 p.m.

UPLOAD DATE
TIME
J.S. Chavan
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H. H. Additional Sessions Judge Shri. R.A.
Room No.)
Sasne
Court Room No. 30.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 17/01/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
19/01/2024
ORDER uploaded on
19/01/2024