1
B.A. 115/24
MHCC020007982024
Presented on
Registered on
Decided on
Duration
: 15-01-2024
: 15-01-2024
: 24-01-2024
: 0 years, 0 months, 9 days
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 115 OF 2024
1.

Mr. Santosh Kumar Ramsihasan Singh
Age- 25 Years, Occ- Labour
R/a. Baidapada, Near Ganesh Temple
Vasai Palghar
2.

Mr. Kalim Wahid Hasan Khan
Age- 30 Years, Occ- Labour
R/a. Baidapada, Near Ganesh Temple
Vasai Palghar
… Applicants/Accused
– Versus –
The State of Maharashtra
(Through D.C.B.CID Police, C.R. 2/2024
Corresponding FIR No. 27/2024 registered
with D.N.Nagar Police Station)
… Respondent
Appearance :Mr. Sharif Shaikh, Advocate for the applicants.
Mr. Iqbal Solkar, A.P.P. for the respondent.

CORAM : SHRI. RAJESH A. SASNE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 24/01/2024.

2
B.A. 115/24
ORDER
1.

This is an application filed by the accused u/sec.439 of
Criminal Procedure Code for releasing them on bail in connection with
C.R.No. 2/2024 registered at D.C.B.CID (Corresponding C.R.No.
27/2024 registered with D.N.Nagar Police Station) for the commission
of offences punishable under Section 188, 272, 273, 328 r/w Section 34
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 59 of Food Safety and Standard
Act, 2006.
2.

It is alleged by the applicants / accused that they are falsely
implicated in the present case. They were arrested on 09/01/2024.
They have undergone custodial interrogation, now accused are in
judicial custody. Investigation is almost over. Nothing is to be seized or
recovered from the possession of the accused. Therefore, there is no
point in keeping accused behind the bars. They are permanent resident
of their given address, therefore they prayed for releasing them on bail.
3.

The prosecution opposed the application by filing reply
vide Exh.2. It is alleged by the prosecution that if the accused are
release on bail there is possibility of threatening of prosecution
witnesses. If accused are released on bail there is possibility of
tampering of prosecution evidence. There is possibility of repetition of
same crime at the hands of the accused. The investigation is in progress
and there is possibility of flee from the justice. Hence, the prosecution
prayed for rejection of the application.
4.

Read the application, say filed by the prosecution. Heard ld.

Advocate for the applicants and ld. APP for the State / Respondent.

3
5.

B.A. 115/24
It is the case of the prosecution that on 07/01/2024 the
officers of respondent received information that some persons are in
attempt to sell contraband article of gutakha. One truck containing such
articles was found. On the basis of disclosure statement of accused
Ibrahim on 09/01/2024 from the possession of applicants one tempo
containing
such
articles
was
seized.

It
is
alleged
that
the
accused/applicants were possessing gutakha of value of Rs.28,17,700/-.
From the facts on record it appears that no recovery is pending from
these accused/applicants.
6.

The applicant has relied on the following judgments
contending that Section 328 of IPC will not be applicable.
1. Gaurav Jayantbhai Hapani V/s. The State of Maharashtra in
ABA NO.3406 of 2022
2. Shaukat Ali Khushiyal Ahmed Pathan V/s. The State of
Maharashtra in ABA No.1658 of 2021
3. Pramod K. Shah V/s. Commissioner of Custom (Export
Promotion S.I.I.B. (Export) and Anr. In Cr. Application
No.4230 of 2006
4. Nipul Nagde V/s. The State of Maharashtra in Petition for
Special Leave to Appeal (Cri.) No.6788/2021
5. Manjabhau Manchakrao Rokde V/s. The State of Maharashtra
in ABA No.844/2020
6. Ramdas Nivrutti Chintalwar V/s. The State of Maharashtra in
ABA 886/2022
7. Sanjay Ramdas Ranware V/s. The State of Maharashtra in
ABA 1366/2022.
7.

It is a matter of fact that the issue pertaining to
4
B.A. 115/24
applicability of Section 328 of IPC is subjudice before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court. In the judgment of Gaurav Hapani’s case supra the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court by order dated 19.01.2023 by considering
the observations in the bail order dated 09.12.2022 and order dated
22.06.2022 in ABA No.1587/22, 1588/22 allowed the anticipatory bail
application in the case where the offence was punishable u/Sec.328,
272, 273 of IPC.
8.

I have gone through the ratio laid down in the case of
aforesaid judgment. The accused are arrested on 09/01/2024. The
police at the time of arrest have recovered alleged gutakha and tempo
carrying said gutakha. The accused were found travelling in the said
tempo carrying gutakha. No recovery appears to be pending against
them. If reasonable conditions securing their presence are imposed,
they will be entitled for the bail. Hence further incarceration of the
applicants/accused is not necessary. In the result, I pass the following
order :
ORDER
1]
Bail Application No. 115 of 2024 is allowed.

2]
Applicants / Accused Mr. Santosh Kumar Ramsihasan Singh and
Mr. Kalim Wahid Hasan Khan arrested in C.R.No. 2/2024 under Section
188, 272, 273, 328 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
59 of Food Safety and Standard Act, 2006 registered at D.C.B.CID
(Corresponding C.R.No. 27/2024 registered with D.N.Nagar Police
Station) be released on bail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.25,000/each with one or two surety/s.

5
3]
B.A. 115/24
The applicants / accused shall not tamper with the prosecution
witnesses and evidence in any manner.
4]
The applicants / accused shall attend the concerned police station
on every Sunday between 07:00 p.m. to 09:00 p.m. till filing charge
sheet or till further order.
5]
Provisional cash bail in the like amount is allowed. The accused
shall furnish surety within 4 weeks from the date of release from jail
failing which the cash bail shall stand forfeited without any separate
order to that effect.
6]
The applicants / accused shall not leave India without prior
permission of the Court.
7]
Bail before the learned Trial Court.

Date : 24/01/2024.

Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed by HHJ on
: 24/01/2024.
: 29/01/2024.
: 31/01/2024.

( RAJESH A. SASNE)
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.

6
B.A. 115/24
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
ORDER.”
06/02/2024
UPLOAD DATE
5.57 p.m.
TIME
Miss M.A.Kulkarni.
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 24/01/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
31/01/2024
ORDER uploaded on
06/02/2024