CRI. BA No.180/22
..1..

in CR No.11/22
MHCC020011102022
Presented on
Registered on
Decided on
Duration
: 21-01-2022
: 21-01-2022
: 03-02-2022
: 0 months, 13 days
IN THE SPECIAL COURT FOR NARCOTIC DRUG AND
PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT, 1985, AT GR. BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.180 OF 2022
IN
CR NO.11 OF 2022
Shahrukh Salim Qureshi @ Shahrukh Pathan)
Aged 28 years, R/O: 4/6, Ashrafi Manzil, )
4th floor, R. No. 29,Chinchunder Cross Lane,)
Khadak, Dongri, Mumbai
) Applicant/Accused
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra,
( At instance of Dongari Police Station,
Mumbai CR No.11/2022 )
)
)
) .. Respondent/Prosecution
Appearance :
Ld. Adv. Shahid Iqbal, for the applicant/accused.
Ld. APP S. S. Panjwanit for the respondent/prosecution.
CORAM : H.H. THE SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS)
SHRI D. B. MANE (C.R.NO.43)
DATE
: 03/02/2022
ORAL ORDER
The
applicant/accused
Shahrukh
Salim
Qureshi
@
Shahrukh Pathan has filed this application u/s.439 of Cr.P.C., to enlarge
CRI. BA No.180/22
..2..

in CR No.11/22
him on bail in C.R. No.11/2022 registered by Dongari police station for
the offence under section 160 of IPC, section 37 r/w section 135 of The
Maharashtra Police Act, u/s 3 and 4 punishable u/s 25 of the Arms Act
and 8(c) punishable under section 20(b)(ii)(A), 22(b) and 29 of the
NDPS Act, 1985.
2.

It is the case of the prosecution that on 12.01.2022, the
informant and other police staff of Dongari Police Station were
patrolling within their jurisdiction. At or about 21:45 hours, while they
were patrolling at Keshavji Naik Road, Dongari at that time, in front of
Vishavraj Bar four persons were shouting loudly and creating deterrence
in public. Hence, the shopkeepers in the vicinity Shut down the shutters
of their shops. The informant and other police staff went towards the
said persons. The person having sharp knife(Chopper) was uttaring that
^vcs ‘kCchj eq>s xu fn[kkrk gSA rsjs dks eSa vkt tku ls ekj Mkyqaxk]
HkMos dgk Hkkx x;k] rsjk vkt xse ctkÅaxkA* The Police apprehended
him(applicant) and other persons namely Shabbir Bashir Shaikh, Imran
and Salman, as they were also shouting in public place. Shabbir Nasim
Shaikh was having fire arm pistol and some live cartridges. The police
team seized contraband MD from the possession of accused Shabbir
Shaikh from his room in Madhu palace lodge.
3.

It is further contended that no contraband has been seized
from the possession of applicant accused. The case of the prosecution
against the applicant accused is about committing offence of affray,
carrying weapon in contravention of order of District Magistrate, under
Maharashtra Police Act and under section 3 and 4 of the Arms Act about
acquisition and possession of arms other than fire arms. The provisions
of NDPS Act does not attract against the applicant/accused, as the said
CRI. BA No.180/22
..3..

in CR No.11/22
contraband is seized from the possession of co-accused, Shabbir Nasim
Shaikh.
It is further contended that the applicant is innocent. He
has been falsely implicated in the crime. He is ready to abide the
conditions which would be imposed by this court. Hence, this
application.
4.

-The prosecution filed reply contending that on 12.01.2022
at 21:45 hours, the applicant and other co-accused were found
committing affray. They were found possessing weapons like chopper,
fire arm pistol in contravention of the provisions under The Arms Act
and the order of District Magistrate. The applicant was found possessing
weapon chopper. It is further contended that three crimes have been
registered against the applicant/accused. The applicant/accused is
habitual offender. If he is enlarged on bail, then the possibility of
creating deterrence in the vicinity cannot be ruled out. So, urged to
reject the bail application.
5.

Heard Ld. Advocate appearing for the applicant/accused
and Ld. APP.
6.

Ld.

Advocate
appearing
for
the
applicant/accused
submitted that the crime registered against the accused are punishable
with imprisonment upto three years. The applicant has not involved in
offences under the NDPS Act. So, urged to allow application.
7.

Per contra, Ld. APP submitted that the applicant/accused
has criminal antecedents. So, the application be rejected. To support his
submissions, Ld. APP relied upon order of Hon’ble Rajasthan High
CRI. BA No.180/22
..4..

in CR No.11/22
Court dated 02.12.2014 in Bail application no. 13027 of 2014 between
Amar Singh Naruka Vs State of Rajasthan and the judgment of Hon’ble
Apex court dated 23.04.2021 in Cri. Appeal no. 448 of 2021 between
Sudha Singh Vs State of Uttarpradesh.
8.

I have carefully gone through the bail application, reply
filed by the prosecution, the submissions at the bar and case laws cited
Supra on which Ld. APP placed reliance.
9.

Upon perusal of reply filed by the prosecution it appears
that the allegations of the prosecution against the applicant/accused is
that on the day, time and place of the incident, the applicant was
shouting in the public place and he was carrying arm Chopper in
contravention of the provisions under the Arms Act and the order of
District Magistrate. No recovery of contraband has been made from the
possession of applicant/accused.
10.

The
main
contention
of
prosecution
is
that
the
applicant/accused has a criminal antecedents. The prosecution has
given the list of following three crimesi. Cr. No. 233/19 registered for offence u/s 324, 504, 506 r/w 34 of
IPC, u/s 37 r/w 135 of The Maharashtra Police Act and u/s 4 r/w
section 25 of The Arms Act,
ii. Cr. No. 312/20 registered for offence u/s 392 r/w 34 of IPC and
iii. Cr. No. 129/19 registered for offence u/s 324 r/w 34 of IPC.
11.

In the case of Anil Kumar Jain (cited supra), the bail was
refused on the ground that as many as 9 other criminal cases for various
offences were registered against the petitioner therein. In the case of
CRI. BA No.180/22
..5..

in CR No.11/22
Sudha Singh (cited supra), application was filed for cancellation of bail
in offence punishable u/s 302 of IPC and it was the submission of
appellant therein that as many as 64 Criminal cases including the
serious offences like murders, dacoity, Criminal intimidation etc were
registered. Upon such facts, it is held by the Hon’ble Apext court that
when the accused was history sheeter, it was imperative for the High
Court to scrutinize every aspect and not capriciously record that the
accused was entitled to be released on bail.
12.

In the case in hand, three crimes have been registered
against the applicant/accused. Two of them for an offence u/s 324, 504,
506 of IPC and one is u/s 392 of IPC. In such circumstances, it is not
proper to detain the applicant/accused behind the bar for indefinite
period on the this count. Some stringent conditions can be imposed
upon the applicant/accused for maintaining piece and order and not to
interfere in the investigation or threaten the prosecution witnesses.
Hence, I proceed to pass following order:ORDER
1. NDPS Bail Application No.180/2022 in C.R. No.11/2022, is hereby
allowed.
2. Applicant/accused Mr. Shahrukh Salim Qureshi @ Shahrukh
Pathan, be released in CR No.11/2022 on executing P. R. Bond of
Rs.35,000/- (Rs. Thirty Five Thousand only) with one or more
sureties in the like amount subject to following conditions.
3. Applicant/accused shall give attendance at Dongari Police Station
on every Monday between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. till filing of the
charge-sheet.

CRI. BA No.180/22
..6..

in CR No.11/22
4. Applicant/accused shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case.
5.

Applicant/accused and his sureties shall provide their respective mobile
numbers and correct address of residence alongwith the names of two
blood relatives with their mobile numbers and addresses.

6.

Applicant/accused shall produce the proof of his identity and proof
of residence at the time of the executing the Bail Bonds.

7.

The accused shall give intimation in writing to Investigating Officer
and this Court as and whenever he changes his residential/
temporary address.

8.

Applicant/accused shall not leave India without prior permission of the
Court.

9.

Applicant/accused shall not commit similar offence while on bail.

10. Breach of any of the conditions of this order shall be a ground for
its cancellation.
Application stands disposed off accordingly.
(Pronounced in open Court)
Mumbai:
Date: 03/02/2022
Dictated on
: 03/02/2022
Transcribed on : 03/02/2022
Signed on
: 03/02/2022
(D. B. MANE)
Special Judge (NDPS)
Court Room No.43, Gr. Bombay.

CRI. BA No.180/22
..7..

in CR No.11/22
“Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed order”.
04/02/2022
at about 01.00 p.m.

(Mr. Kailas Uttam Kshirsagar)
(Typist)
Court Room No.43, Gr. Mumbai
Name of the Hon’ble Judge
:
SHRI D. B. MANE,
Special Judge (NDPS)
Court Room No.43, Gr. Mumbai
Date of pronouncement of Order
:
03/02/2022
Order signed by Hon’ble Judge on
:
03/02/2022
Order uploaded on
:
04/02/2022
at about 01.00 p.m.