BA 116/2024
1
MHCC020008132024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER MUMBAI AT MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 116 OF 2024
IN
C.R. NO. 518 OF 2023
Mohammed Waqash Tayyab Ali Shah
… Applicant/accused
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
(Through of Chunabhatti Police Station) … Respondent/State
Appearance :Mr. Qureshi Tahir Zakir, Ld. Advocates for applicant/accused.
Mr. O.S. Maraskolhe, Ld. APP for the Respondent/State.
CORAM : H. H. THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
SHRI A.S. SALGAR (C.R. NO.24)
DATED : 20TH JANUARY, 2024
(ORAL ORDER)
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
This is an application filed by applicant/accused under
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for releasing
him on regular bail in connection with C.R. No.518/2023 registered
with Chunabhatti police station for the offence punishable under
Sections 326, 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the I.P.C.

BA 116/2024
2.

2
The applicant/accused submitted that he is innocent.

The entire story of the police is false and cooked up. There is no
direct or indirect nexus between applicant with said alleged
incident. The applicant/accused is falsely implicated in this crime.
There
is
no
recovery
and
discovery
pending
against
applicant/accused. The offences are not at all applicable to the
applicant/accused. No purpose will be served by keeping
applicant/accused in the custody. The applicant is ready and willing
to comply with and abide by conditions imposed by the Court.
Hence, applicant/accused prayed for grant of regular bail in
connection with C.R. No.518/2023 registered with Chunabhatti
police station.
3.

The Investigation officer submitted reply at Exh.02 and
resisted the application on the ground that investigation is in
progress. The weapon used in the crime is yet to be recovered. If
bail is granted to the applicant/accused then he will put pressure
on prosecution witnesses. There is possibility that other crimes
might have registered against applicant/accused within the area of
Mumbai. Lastly, investigating officer prayed for rejection of bail
application.
4.

Heard Ld. Adv. Mr. Tahir Qureshi for the accused and
Ld. APP O.S. Maraskolhe for Respondent/State.
5.

On the basis of the report lodged by the informant
namely Mohd. Yakub Khan, Chunabhatti police station registered
C.R. No. 518/2023 for offences punishable under Sections 326,
324, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34 of I. P .C. against the accused persons. It
BA 116/2024
3
is alleged that on 02.12.2023 at about 23.00 p.m. the informant
was playing Badminton in the compound of their building with the
local people. On 02-12-2023 at about 00.40 hours in front of gate
of Gulistan Building, Qureshi Nagar, the accused persons namely
Kaif Nanhe Khan, Samir Rais Khan, Gabbar Khan, son of Tayyab
namely Wakas raised dispute with the informant on the ground of
playing Cricket and abused to him. They hit cement block on the
head of complainant causing grievous injury to him. The friend of
informant namely Maujam Khan also sustained injury. The blood
started oozing from the head of informant. The accused also gave
threat to kill informant. Hence, the aforesaid complaint was lodged
against the accused persons at police station.
6.

It is to be noted that the name of applicant/accused is
mentioned in FIR as accused No.4. I have gone through the FIR. In
FIR the allegations are levelled against principal accused namely
Kaif Nanhe Khan that he assaulted informant by means of cement
block on his head and caused grievous injury to him. The
applicant/accused alongwith other accused persons assaulted
witnesses Maujam Yunus Khan and Ayan Khan by bamboo sticks
and caused injuries. In FIR there are no allegation against the
applicant/accused that he inflicted blow by cement block on the
head of the informant. On the contrary all the allegation are against
the principal accused namely Kaif Nanhe Khan that he assaulted
informant by means of cement block on his head and caused
grievous injuries. Thus it is clear that the allegation in respect of
committing the offence in respect of Section 326 of IPC is levelled
against principal accused namely Kaif Nanhe Khan. There are no
allegation that the applicant/accused has assaulted informant and
BA 116/2024
4
caused grievous injuries to him. The role of applicant/accused is
limited one.
7.

In present case, the applicant/accused was arrested on
3.01.2024. The accused was granted PCR by the Ld. Metropolitan
Magistrate. During the PCR nothing has been recovered at the
instance
of
accused.

Therefore
further
detention
of
applicant/accused is not required.
8.

In present case, the applicant/accused is in jail from
3.01.2024. No purpose will be served by keeping him behind bar. It
is settled law that bail is rule and jail is exception. The alleged
offence is triable by Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate. It will take time to
commence the trial of the case. The accused cannot be kept in jail
for indefinite period. If bail is not granted to the applicant/accused,
then it will amount to pre-trial conviction. The applicant/accused is
ready to abide the terms and conditions imposed by the Court.
Therefore, applicant/accused is entitled for grant of regular bail.
9.

In present case it appears that the investigation of the
crime to the extent of applicant/accused is completed. From the
report of investigating officer it appears that investigating officer
has recorded the statements of witnesses and collected the injury
certificates of injured witnesses. He also drawn spot panchanama
and seized the cement block and wooden bamboo stick from the
spot. Prima facie it appears that the investigation of the crime to the
extent of applicant/accused is completed and hence, there is no
hurdle to grant bail to the applicant/accused.

BA 116/2024
10.

5
It is argued by Ld. A.P.P. that the applicant/accused is
having criminal antecedents. It is submitted that the two crimes are
registered against applicant/accused at Chunabhatti police station
and Wadala T.T. police station and hence it is submitted by the
prosecution that bail be refused to the applicant/accused. It is
material to note that in both the crimes the applicant/accused is
released on bail. Merely because two crimes are pending against
applicant/accused, only on that count, bail cannot be refused to
him. In my view, stringent conditions can be imposed against the
applicant/accused so that he could not involve in the similar type of
offence. Therefore, I am of the view that only because criminal
antecedent is pending against applicant/accused the bail cannot be
rejected. Hence, I find no substance in the contention of Ld. APP
that accused has criminal antecedent and bail be refused to him.
11.

Considering the nature of offence and role played by
the applicant/accused in the crime, I am of the view that
applicant/accused is entitled for regular bail. Therefore, bail
application needs to be allowed. Hence, I proceed to pass following
order :ORDER
1.

Criminal
Bail
Application
No.116
of
2024
filed
by
Applicant/accused is allowed.
2.

Applicant/accused namely Mohammed Waqash Tayyab Ali
Shah resident of Qureshi Nagar, Kurla (E), Mumbai be
released on regular bail on furnishing P. R. Bond of
Rs.15,000/- along with one or more sureties in like amount
in connection with C.R. No. 518/2023 registered with
BA 116/2024
6
Chunabhatti police station for the offence punishable under
Sections 326, 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the I.P.C. on following
conditions :(a) The applicant/accused is directed to attend concerned
police station on every Sunday between 9.00 a.m. to 12.00
noon till filing of the charge-sheet.
(b) The applicant/accused and his sureties shall provide their
respective residential addresses, mobile numbers and email
addresses,
if
any
to
investigation
officer.

The
applicant/accused shall intimate any such change in address
or telephone number and Email ID forthwith.
(c) The applicant/accused should not directly or indirectly
make any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with facts of case so as to dissuade them from
disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer and should
not tamper with the evidence and prosecution witnesses.
(d) The applicant/accused shall not leave India without prior
permission of Ld. Trial Court.
(e) The applicant/accused is directed not to enter into the
vicinity where informant resides till disposal of the case.
(f) Breach of any conditions by the the applicant/accused,
shall result in cancellation of bail.

BA 116/2024
3.

7
Provisional cash bail of Rs.15,000/- is allowed to the
applicant/accused for period of 4 weeks to furnish surety
from the date of release.

4.

Bail before Ld. Trial Court.

5.

Criminal Bail Application No. 116 of 2024 stands disposed off
accordingly.

Date : 20.01.2024
Dictated on
: 20/01/2024
Transcribed on : 20/01/2024
HHJ signed on : 20/01/2024
[A.S. SALGAR]
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
GREATER MUMBAI
(C.R. No.24)
BA 116/2024
8
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
20/01/2024 4.15 p.m.

Name of Stenographer
PRAJWALA V. PHODKAR
Name of the Judge (With Court HHJ SHRI. A.S. SALGAR (CR 24)
Room No.)
Date of Pronouncement
JUDGMENT /ORDER
of 20/01/2024
JUDGMENT /ORDER signed by 20/01/2024
P.O. on
JUDGMENT /ORDER uploaded 20/01/2024
on