Cri. B.App.513 /2022
1
CNR No.

MHNS010020212022
Order below Exh.1 in Cri. Bail Application No.513 /2022
( Applicant/accused Vajid Vahid Chaudhari Vs. State )
This is an application for pre­arrest bail u/s. 438 of
the Cr.P.C. in C.R. No.82 of 2022 registered with Bhadrakali Police
Station, Nashik u/ss.

454,380 r/w.34 of The Indian Penal
Code(IPC).
2.
submits
The learned counsel Mr. I.F. Inamdar for the applicant
that, applicant is
innocent person and
he is not
concerned with said offence. He is a driver by profession and
only earning member of his family. Accused 1 Imran Ismile Khan
was arrested on 27.03.2022 and after recovery of muddemal
property at his instance,he was released on bail on 29.03.2022 by
the learned lower Court. There is apprehension of his arrest. He is
ready to abide by any of the terms and conditions to be imposed by
this Court. He has got fix and permanent place of residence and
undertakes to cooperate investigation.
3.

Learned A.P.P. Mr. R.M. Baghdane, by filing pursis
(Exh.7) adopted say (Exh.8) filed by Investigation officer (I.O.) and
strongly objected this application. I.O. is present alongwith the
case papers.
4.

It is the case of prosecution that, informant Irfan Rafiq
Chaudhari
lodged
complaint
against
unknown
person
for
commission of offence of theft. Accused 1 was arrested on
2
27.03.2022 in the said offence. Ld. APP objected this application on
the ground that, accused 1 had given statement about involvement
of applicant alongwith him in the said crime.
5.

Perusal of record reveals that, Investigation is in
complete. Muddemal property is to be recovered at the instance of
applicant. He has got criminal antecedents having involvement in
the following offences.
(i) C.R. No. II­158/2017
of Bhadrakali Police station
u/s.12(A) of the Prevention of The Bombay Gambling Act.
(ii) C.R. No. II­667/2018 of Bhadrakali Police station
u/s.12(A) of the Prevention of The Bombay Gambling Act.
(iii) C.R. No. II­112/2021 of Mumbai Naka Police station
u/s. 326,324,504,506 r/w.34 of The Indian Penal Code.
(iv) C.R. No. II­112/2021 of Upnagar Police station
u/s. 454,457,380 r/w.34 of The Indian Penal Code.
6.

To buttress his submission, that, pendency of C.R.

cannot be ground to reject bail,
Mr. Inamdar
relies upon, “
Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs.State of U.P. & Anr.,
in
Criminal Appeal No. 159 of 2012 ( Arising out of S.L.P.(Cri.)
No.10244 of 2010, SC)” In the reported case, regular bail was
granted as the accused was in custody since long period of time.
Present application is in respect of pre­arrest bail. Thus, the factual
backgrounds in the above reported ruling is entirely different.
Hence, it is not applicable herein. Mr. Inamdar submits that, C.R.
No. II­112/2021
of Upnagar Police station u/s. 454,457,380
r/w.34 of The Indian Penal Code, is not registered against him.
However, according to police, it is registered against him. That
3
apart, other three C.Rs. are also pending against him. The
applicant is directly involved in the commission of offence, there is
sufficient material against him. Offence is serious and investigation
is incomplete. Co­accused is yet to be arrested. Custodial
interrogation is necessary for thorough investigation. He may
hamper or tamper prosecution witnesses or evidence. I do not find
any merits in this application. Consequently, I am not inclined to
exercise my discretion in favour of the applicant. Hence, the order.
ORDER
This application stands rejected.

Date : 29.04. 2022.

( S.T. Tripathi)
Additional Sessions Judge­7,
Nashik.