Bail Application No.884/2024.
MHCC020056272024
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE MUMBAI,
AT GR. MUMBAI
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 884 OF 2024.
IN
C.R. NO. 148 OF 2024.

Naved Mohammad Arab
… Applicant.

Vs.
The State of Maharashtra,
(At the instance of Antop Hill Police Station,
Mumbai, Vide C.R.No.148/2024).

…Respondent.

Appearances :Ld. Adv. Ms. Sneha Satve for the Applicant.
Ld. APP. Mr. Abhijeet Gondwal for the State/Respondent.
CORAM : H.H. THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
DR. A. A. JOGLEKAR (C.R.NO.37)
DATED : 06TH APRIL, 2024.
ORAL ORDER
By this application the applicant Naved Mohammad Arab
being accused in C.R.No.148/2024 registered with Antop Hill Police
Station, Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 341,
Page 1 of 6
Bail Application No.884/2024.
353, 504, 506 (2) of the Indian Penal Code, (hereinafter referred to
as, “IPC”), alongwith Sections 3 (2) (D) of the Prohibition of
Destruction to Public Properties Act, seeks bail under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (In short, “Cr.P.C.”). This is an
application preferred post filing of charge-sheet.
THE CASE OF PROSECUTION IN SHORT ENSUES AS UNDER;
2.

It is alleged that, while the informant being a BEST Bus
driver proceeded on enroute 172 from Pratiksha Nagar Depot until P.
K. Kurne Chowk Worli at about 9.45 p.m. as on 22.03.2023. Further,
the bus arrived at Kalpak Naka wherein an unknown person parked
his scooty infront of the bus and hurled abuses to the informant.
While the informant tried to pacify him the said individual picked a
stone and had threw it on the front glass of the bus. The said video is
recorded by the one of the passenger. Thereafter, the said person fled
from the spot leaving behind the said scooty.

Further, the said
individual was identified by the police from the footage and then he
was put under arrest under Sections ibid.
3.

Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused states that, the
applicant/accused is falsely implicated and that the FIR is registered
with delay. It is stated that, the informant was unaware of the name
of the applicant/accused and at the instance of the investigating
officer the applicant/accused was named in the FIR. Further, the
investigation has substantially concluded and further incarceration is
not required. Hence, the Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused prayed
for enlarging the applicant/accused on bail.
Page 2 of 6
Bail Application No.884/2024.

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 enlarge on bail
might threaten the informant and witnesses and also might abscond.
Further, there is every possibility that he might tamper with the
evidence.

Hence, the Ld. Prosecutor prayed for rejection of
application.
5.

Heard Ld. Advocate for Applicant/accused and Ld.
Prosecutor for the State. Perused application and reply.

6.

On meticulous examination of the case record it evinces to
myself that, the applicant/accused is arrested as on 22.03.2024 and
thereafter, the police have conducted investigation and nothing is
stated to be recovered at the instance of the applicant/accused.
Further, considering the accusations in prima-facie the factum of
usage of criminal force or assault is not located and this ipso-facto
ventilates for such enlargement of applicant/accused as redressed by
him.

7.

Moreover, while deciding an application for bail it is settled
that the Court is required to see whether the prima-facie case exists
or not. It is not necessary to make roving enquiry or examining the
merits of prosecution case.

8.

Thus, considering the fulcrum of arguments advanced by
the Ld. Advocate for applicant/accused it is evident that, the alleged
Page 3 of 6
Bail Application No.884/2024.
incident is sans any usage of criminal force or assault and therefore,
the very ingredients of the Section 353 of IPC are not attracted in
prima-facie.

Therefore, in view of the same, I hold that, the
apprehension of the prosecution can be taken care of by saddling
stringent conditions including marking of presence with that of the
respondent agency. In the backdrop of aforesaid facts, I hold that, the
application deserves consideration. Hence, order infra :ORDER
1. Bail Application No.884/2024 is allowed.
2. The applicant/accused Naved Mohammad Arab
being accused in C.R.No.148/2024 registered with
Antop Hill Police Station for the offences punishable
under Sections 341, 353, 504, 506 (2) of the Indian
Penal Code, (hereinafter referred to as, “IPC”),
alongwith Sections 3 (2) (D) of the Prohibition of
Destruction to Public Properties 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 sureties shall
provide their respective residential addresses,
mobile numbers and email addresses, if any. The
applicant/accused shall intimate any such change in
address or telephone number and Email ID
forthwith.
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
Bail Application No.884/2024.
6. The applicant/accused shall attend the Antop Hill
Police Station on every Tuesday and Friday between
11.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m. until further order.
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 India without
permission of this Court.
9. Any breach of the conditions in this bail order shall
entail cancellation of bail forthwith.
10.Bail Application No.884/2024 stands disposed of
accordingly.

DR. ABHAY
AVINASH
JOGLEKAR
Date : 06.04.2024.

Digitally signed by
DR. ABHAY
AVINASH
JOGLEKAR
Date: 2024.04.06
16:51:59 +0530
(Dr. A. A. JOGLEKAR)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Bombay (C.R.No.37)
Dictated on
: 06.04.2024.
Transcribed on : 06.04.2024.
HHJ signed on : 06.04.2024.

Page 5 of 6
Bail Application No.884/2024.

“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date
Upload Time
Name of Stenographer
06.04.2024
04.51 p.m.

Mahendrasing D. Patil
Stenographer (Grade-I)
Name of the Judge (With Court
Room No.)
Date of Pronouncement
JUDGMENT/ORDER
HHJ Dr. A. A. JOGLEKAR
(Court Room No. 37)
of
06.04.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by
P.O. on
06.04.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER
on
06.04.2024
uploaded
Page 6 of 6