1
MHNS010030302022
Order below Exh. 1 in Criminal Bail
Application No. 762/2022.
1.

This is an application moved by the applicant/accused Sameer
@ Badshah Gayasuddin Shaikh under section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure in C.R.No. I­58/2022 registered against accused at Bhadrakali
Police Station for the offence punishable under sections 307, 143, 147,
148, 149, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 135 of the
Maharashtra Police Act.
2.

It is submitted by the accused that he is innocent and has
been falsely implicated. Only on the basis of suspicion his name has been
implicated. Mother of the accused has filed complaint with Bhadrakali
Police Station with respect to the incident whereby she informed Sameer
@ Puppy as to where Badshah has gone. He also threatened her that she
should ask her son to work for him otherwise he will have to face the
consequences. After the occurrence of above incidence there was
apprehension in the mind of informant that the mother of the accused will
file complaint so the informant lodged the complaint.

Informant has
obtained medical certificate from private hospital on the basis of which
offence has been registered. Nothing has to be recovered from the
accused. Co­accused has been released on bail. He is ready to abide by all
the terms and conditions, hence, prayed to allow the application.
3.

Say was called of the investigating officer. He has objected
this application on the count that, accused has committed offence against
the body which was witnessed by independent witnesses which clearly
2
reflects the involvement of the present accused. There are three offences
pending against the present accused, if he is released on bail he will
threaten the witnesses and destroy the evidence.

Present accused has
history of political background and elections are nearing in Nashik
Municipal Corporation. There is possibility that if accused is released he
along with his associates will create further dispute between them by
committing similar type of offence or more serious offence than the
present crime may occur. Hence, prayed that application be rejected.
4.

Heard Ld. APP and Ld. Advocate for accused. It is submitted
by the Advocate for accused that accused is in jail since 24/03/2022. Co­
accused with similar allegations are already released on bail whereas co­
accused Shahabad has been released on interim anticipatory bail by
Hon’ble High Court. Investigation is completed. Charge­sheet has been
filed. Nothing remains to be investigated. Prima­facie it is seen that due
to political rivalry offence has been registered. Omnibus allegations has
been made against the present accused. Injury certificate reflects that it is
obtained from private hospital and not from Civil Hospital. After two days
of hospitalization complainant was discharge. Mother of the accused has
filed FIR against the complainant and offence has been registered. Hence,
prayed that on the ground of parity accused be released on bail.
5.

Investigating Officer and Ld. APP for the state have strongly
objected this application on the ground that parity will not be applicable
to the present accused as injury caused by the accused is on the head of
the complainant. Knife is recovered from the accused as well as blood
stained clothes are recovered from accused only. Accused is habitual
offender who has committed similar type of offence, hence, prayed that
bail application be rejected.

3
6.

After hearing the Ld. Advocate for the accused, Ld. APP for
the State and perused the case papers. The FIR states that present accused
assaulted the complainant on his head by knife. It is seen that accused
Firoz and Imran are released on bail, however, on considering their role it
is seen that Firoz and Atiq assaulted the complainant by iron rod on the
hand and leg of complainant whereas Shahabad and Imran assaulted the
complainant by wooden stick on his back. In such circumstances, the role
of the accused released on bail is totally different from the present
accused. Hence, accused cannot seek parity as the role attributed to the
present accused is totally different from the accused who are released on
bail. It is pertinent to state that injury certificate reflects that complainant
sustained contusion lacerated wound over the scalp, nature of injury is
grievous. Merely because certificate has been obtained from the private
hospital it cannot be said that the certificate is not reliable. It is a part of
the trial to consider the said aspect at this stage mini trial is not expected.
The certificate does not reflect for how many days the complainant was
admitted in the hospital, however, grievous injury is caused to the
complainant. If accused is released on bail he will threaten the witnesses
and destroy the evidence. Considering the nature of offence, I am not
inclined to released the accused on bail, hence, following order is passed :­
ORDER
Application is hereby rejected.

Nashik.
Date : 24/06/2022.

Sd/­xxx
(V.S.Malkalpatte­Reddy)
Additional Sessions Judge,
Nashik.