B.A.1846/2022
MHCC020100432022
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE MUMBAI,
AT GR. MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1846 OF 2022
IN
C.R. NO. 772 OF 2022
Moinuddin Mohijuddin Qureshi
… Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of Vakola Police Station,
Vide C.R.No. 772/2022)
…Respondent.
Appearances :
Ld. Adv. Mr. Imran Shaikh for the Applicant.
Ld. APP. Mr. Sukhdeve for the State/ Respondent.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR (C.R.NO.37)
DATED : 12TH AUGUST, 2022
ORAL ORDER
By this application the applicant Moinuddin Mohijuddin
Qureshi being accused in C.R.No. 772/2022 registered with Vakola
Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 353 of Indian
Penal Code, (hereinafter referred to as, “IPC”) read with Section 142 of
Page 1 of 6
B.A.1846/2022
Maharashtra Police Act, seeks bail under Section 439 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short, “CrPC”).
THE CASE OF PROSECUTION IN SHORT ENSUES AS UNDER;
2.
As on 24.07.2022 informant was on night duty and
attached with Crime Prohibition Cell, and while upon patrolling duty
within the jurisdiction of Vakola Police Station as on 25.07.2022 at
about 4.00 hours the informant was in receipt of a secret information
that an individual qua the applicant/accused inspite of being directed
by the DCP ZoneVIII, has proposed to come within the said jurisdiction
at his place of residence at Room No. 15, Yasin Kasai Chawl, Shastri
Nagar, Kalina, Mumbai. Accordingly, campaign was arranged and at
about 4.30 hours an individual as per the description in the information
was found at the said spot, as the sleuth approached the said individual,
he tried to flee from the spot, but the sleuth intercepted him. The
applicant/accused disclosed his name as Moinuddin Mohijuddin
Qureshi. Applicant/accused when intercepted by the sleuth in order to
escape assaulted the sleuth and also had altercation with them. Hence,
offence was registered against the applicant/accused and he was put
under arrest under the sections ibid.
3.
The Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused states that, the
applicant is falsely implicated in the matter. It is further stated that, the
applicant/accused is victim of circumstances.
Also, the story of
prosecution is highly doubtful and considering the sections invoked no
primafacie
offence
is
made
out.
Hence,
Ld. Advocate
for
applicant/accused prayed for enlargement of the applicant/accused on
bail.
Page 2 of 6
B.A.1846/2022
4.
Per contra the prosecution has filed their reply vide Exh.2
and inter alia have resisted the application upon various grounds. It is
categorically stated that, the applicant/accused if enlarged on bail
would threaten the prosecution witnesses. Further, he states that the
applicant/accused is a habitual offender and would commit such
offences time and again. Hence, the Ld. Prosecutor prayed for rejection
of application.
5.
Heard learned advocate for Applicant/accused, and learned
prosecutor for the state. Perused application and reply.
6.
On meticulous examination of the case papers it evinces to
myself that, as per the theory of prosecution the applicant/accused was
directed to refrain himself from coming in the said jurisdiction, as per
the directions of the DCP, ZoneVIII and inspite of this the
applicant/accused came at the spot and while he was intercepted, he
i.e. the applicant/accused had altercations with the sleuth and also had
assaulted them thereby causing obstructions in discharge of the official
duties.
In this regard, in order to substantiate the said factum of
altercation in primafacie or any such criminal force and/or assault as
envisaged as a prerequisite qua sinequanon element of Section 353
nothing is placed on record.
7.
While deciding an application for bail it is settled that the
Court is required to see whether the primafacie case exists or not. It is
not necessary to make roving enquiry or examining the merits of
prosecution case.
Page 3 of 6
B.A.1846/2022
8.
In this regard, prosecution has apprehended for the
threatening of the prosecution witnesses and that the applicant/accused
is a habitual offender and would also engage himself in such acts again.
Considering the factum of assault or criminal force this Court had raised
a specific query with the Ld. Prosecutor, upon which he fairly stated
that primafacie nothing appears in the reply to that effect. Considering
this particular fact the apprehension of the prosecution can be taken
care of by saddling stringent conditions including marking of presence
of the applicant/accused with the respondent agency. In the backdrop
of the aforesaid facts, I hold that the application deserves to be allowed.
Hence, order infra:
ORDER
1. Bail Application No. 1846/2022 is allowed.
2. The applicant Moinuddin Mohijuddin Qureshi
being accused in C.R.No. 772/2022 registered with
Vakola Police Station for the offences punishable
under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code read
with Section 142 of Maharashtra Police Act, be
released on furnishing P. R. bond of Rs.30,000/
(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two
sureties in the like amount.
3. The applicant/accused and his surety shall provide
their respective residential addresses, mobile
numbers and email addresses, if any.
4. The Applicant/Accused shall not directly or
indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise
to any person acquainted with the facts of the
present case to dissuade them from disclosing such
facts to the Court.
5. The Applicant/Accused shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence in any manner.
Page 4 of 6
B.A.1846/2022
6. The Applicant/Accused shall attend Vakola Police
Station, on every Tuesday and Friday between
11.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. until filing of charge
sheet.
7. The Applicant/Accused shall surrender his passport
if any with the investigating officer. If the applicant
doesn’t have passport, he will furnish an affidavit to
that effect.
8. The Applicant/Accused shall not leave Maharashtra
without permission of this Court.
9. Bail Application No. 1846/2022 stands disposed of
accordingly.
DR. ABHAY
AVINASH
JOGLEKAR
Date : 12.08.2022
Digitally signed by
DR. ABHAY
AVINASH JOGLEKAR
Date: 2022.08.19
15:34:59 +0530
(DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (C.R.No.37)
Dictated on
: 12.08.2022
Transcribed on : 17.08.2022
HHJ signed on : 19.08.2022
Page 5 of 6
B.A.1846/2022
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE
ORIGINAL SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
19.08.2022
03.34 p.m.
Mahendrasing D. Patil
Stenographer (GradeI)
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
HHJ DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR
(Court Room No. 37)
Date of Pronouncement
JUDGEMENT /ORDER
12.08.2022
of
JUDGEMENT /ORDER signed by
P.O. on
19.08.2022
JUDGEMENT /ORDER uploaded
on
19.08.2022
Page 6 of 6