1
Cri BA No.110-2024
MHCC020007432024
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.110 OF 2024
Mohd Matin Niyaj Ahmad,
Age: 22 Years, Occ: Service.

]
] …Applicant.

Versus
The State of Maharashtra
]
(At the instance of Kurla Police Station Vide C.R. ]
No.503 of 2023)
] …Respondent.
Advocate Imran Sheikh for applicant.
APP Sulbha Joshi for the State.
CORAM :
SHRI. S.B. PAWAR,
THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE (C.R. No.58)
DATE
:
29th JANUARY, 2024.
ORDER
The applicant, who is arrested in connection with C.R.
No.503 of 2023 registered with Kurla Police Station for offence
punishable under sections 307, 353, 279, 332, 333, 336 of the Indian
Penal Code and sections 184 and 135 (a) (b) of the Motor Vehicles Act,
has filed the present application for regular bail under section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2.

As per the case of prosecution, on 28.11.2023 first
informant Police Constable Laxman Madhukar Mojar, was on traffic
2
Cri BA No.110-2024
control duty at L.B.S. Road. The applicant came in a Wagon-R Car from
Ghatkopar on L.B.S. Road and took right u-turn at a divider, where uturn was not allowed and started proceeding towards Ghatkopar. The
first informant came infront of the car, which was being driven slowly
and gave signal to the applicant to stop the car. However, applicant did
not stop the car.

He abruptly increased the speed of car. The first
informant fell down infront of the car. The applicant ran over the car on
the person of the first informant with intention to kill him. The first
informant sustained fracture on his right thigh and other injuries on his
head and fingers of hand. The applicant fled from the spot with the
vehicle. Initially, the complaint was filed against unknown car driver on
the same day.
3.

The applicant contends that he is falsely implicated. He is
victim of circumstances.

The story of prosecution is doubtful.

The
offence leveled against the applicant is not attracted. He is a young
person and belongs to poor family. His further custody may affect his
future and thus, seeks the bail.
4.

Prosecution in reply Exh.2 opposed the prayer on the
grounds that the applicant drove car over the person of the first
informant with intention to cause his death. He may pressurize the
witnesses and may obstruct in the investigation. There is possibility
that he may destroy the evidence and flee to his native place in Uttar
Pradesh.
5.

Heard Mr. Imran Sheikh, learned Advocate for the applicant
and learned APP Sulbha Joshi for the State. Learned Advocate for the
applicant argued that applicant is 22 years old.

He is arrested on
3
Cri BA No.110-2024
25.12.2023 as he surrendered on the instructions of his family
members. By inviting attention of the Court to the contents of remand
application dated 28.12.2023, he submits that as per the case of
prosecution when informant came ahead of the vehicle, the vehicle was
moving and was not stationary. It is not the case of prosecution that
applicant started the car and ran over the informant with any intention.
The facts indicate that informant suddenly came in front of the moving
car and therefore, the accident took place. He further submits that
except offence under section 307 of IPC, all the other offences are
bailable.

The offence under section 307 of IPC is prima facie not
attracted. Therefore, he urged that the application be allowed.
6.

Learned
APP argued that
the incident
took place
immediately after the applicant took u-turn therefore, naturally the
speed of the car was slow. It is not possible to click photograph unless
the car is stopped. The facts indicate that the applicant was trying to
run away with the car. He suddenly increased the speed of the car
when informant was infront of the car and was trying to stop him. The
intention has to be gathered from the act and the act prima facie
attracts offence under section 307 of IPC.

She further argued that
identity of the accused could be ascertained after strenuous inquiry by
police. The facts disclose that applicant has no respect for law. The
offence is serious and investigation is under progress. Therefore, as per
her submissions the applicant can not be admitted to bail at this stage.
7.

I have carefully considered submissions of both the sides.

Perused the FIR and remand applications dated 26.12.2023 and
28.12.2023 annexed with the application. The incident took place on
28.11.2023. However, applicant is arrested on 25.12.2023.

4
8.

Cri BA No.110-2024
As per the facts disclosed in remand applications and FIR,
after taking u-turn, the applicant started to proceed towards Ghatkopar
and at that time, the informant who was on traffic control duty at the
said place tried to stop the applicant by coming infront of the car and
giving him the signal. It is specific case of the prosecution that at the
said time, car was proceeding in slow speed. It further appears that
alongwith the car, the informant was moving backwards by giving signal
to the applicant to take the vehicle to aside. It further appears that the
applicant tried to follow the first informant in the direction in which
first informant was moving on the road and ultimately, he suddenly
increased the speed due to which first informant fell infront of the car
and the applicant drove the car on his body due to which he sustained
fracture to thigh and other injuries.
9.

The facts prima faice indicate that the applicant had atleast
knowledge that the act of increasing the speed and running the car over
the person of first informant may prove to be fatal and despite of it, he
increased the speed and drove the car, even when the first informant
had fallen down infront of the car. Therefore, at this juncture, in my
view, it can not be said that offence under section 307 of IPC is not
attracted against the applicant. The offence is very serious and is under
investigation. The accused could be arrested after almost one month of
the incident. The entire incident is captured in CCTV and its footage is
available with the investigating agency which shows prima facie
involvement of the applicant in the offence.
10.

Though learned Advocate for applicant submits that the
applicant surrendered before police, the version of investigating agency
5
Cri BA No.110-2024
is different. The reply indicates that the investigating agency was
required to undertake arduous efforts to trace out and nab the
applicant. Therefore, considering his previous conduct, possibility of his
fleeing from justice can not be ruled out. In these circumstances, in
view of the nature of the offence and the stage of investigation,
applicant can not be enlarged on bail and the application is liable to be
rejected. Thus, following order is passed:
ORDER
1.

Criminal Bail Application No.110 of 2024 filed by applicant Mohd
Matin Niyaj Ahmad in connection with C.R. No.503 of 2023 registered
with Kurla Police Station for offence under sections 307, 353, 279, 332,
333, 336 of Indian Penal Code and sections 184 and 135 (a) (b) of the
Motor Vehicles Act, is rejected.
2.

Criminal Bail Application No.110 of 2024 is disposed off
accordingly.

Date : 29/01/2024
Order Dictated on: 29/01/2024
Transcribed on : 30/01/2024
Checked on
: 31/01/2024
Signed on
: 31/01/2024
(S.B. PAWAR)
Additional Sessions Judge
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
31.10.2024
Upload Time
5.02 p.m.

Name of Stenographer
ARUN ANNAMALAI MUDALIYAR
Name of the Judge (With Court SHRI. S.B. PAWAR (CR 58)
Room No.)
THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
6
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
of 29.01.2024
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by 31.01.2024
P.O. on
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded 31.01.2024
on
Cri BA No.110-2024