Mumbai, April 9, 2025 (Thane News Network): In a surprising turn of events, Additional Sessions Judge Shri N. P. Tribhuwan, presiding over Court Room No. 23 at the City Civil and Sessions Court in Greater Mumbai, has granted bail to two alleged habitual thieves, Vasim Shamasulah Chowdhary (47) and Zulfikar Bhondu Khan (37). The duo were arrested in connection with Crime No. 475/2023 registered at Gamdevi Police Station for offences under Sections 457 (house-trespass in order to commit offence), 454 (lurking house-trespass or house-breaking in order to commit offence), and 380 (theft in dwelling house, etc.) read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The order for their conditional release was delivered on January 8, 2024, in Criminal Bail Application No. 36 of 2024.
The prosecution’s case stated that on November 30, 2023, the informant, Nagesh Gopal Bangera, a supervisor at Forem Engineering Pvt. Ltd., lodged a complaint. He reported that his office, located on the 4th Floor of Mahalaxmi Chambers, B.D. Road, Mumbai, was closed as usual on December 2, 2023, at 6:00 p.m. Upon returning on December 4, 2023, at 9:00 a.m., he discovered that the cabin door of his employer was open. Subsequent verification revealed the theft of ₹1,97,800 in cash and four God idols valued at ₹70,000, totaling a loss of ₹2,67,800.
According to the prosecution, the police, acting on a tip-off, apprehended the accused on December 19, 2023, in the Kalamboli area of Navi Mumbai. During the investigation, the accused allegedly confessed to committing the crime. Shockingly, the prosecution revealed a long list of previous involvements of the accused in similar offences. These included Crime Nos. 280/2023, 35/2023, and 277/2023, all registered at Gamdevi Police Station for the same offences, as well as Crime Nos. 270/2007 and 103/2014 for theft at Azad Maidan Police Station. Furthermore, their criminal history included Crime Nos. 124/2007, 127/2007, 230/2007, 131/2007, 132/2007, 127/2008, 131/2008, 124/2004 under Sections 454, 457, 380 r/w 34 of IPC registered with DCB CID, and Crime No. 85/2019 registered at D.B. Marg Police Station.
Ms. Shagupta Shaikh, the learned Advocate for the applicants, argued that her clients were falsely implicated and were not connected to the recovered articles, which included a screwdriver, wooden hammer, pliers, hexa blade, and cash. She contended that the police had arrested them merely on suspicion, and since custodial interrogation and investigation were complete, with the theft articles recovered, no further custody was required. She emphasized that nothing was recovered at the instance of the present applicants, who had been in jail since December 19, 2023.
Mrs. Ranjana Budhwant, the learned APP for the State, strongly opposed the bail, labeling the accused as habitual thieves with numerous pending cases against them. She argued that considering their extensive criminal antecedents, they were likely to commit similar offences if released, pressurize prosecution witnesses, and abscond as they were not permanent residents of Mumbai.
In a significant point of argument, Ms. Shaikh relied on the case law of Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi Vs. State of U.P. and another (2012(1) SCC (Cri) 681), where the Supreme Court allowed bail after two years of arrest despite the accused facing several criminal cases, most of which ended in acquittal or were pending trial. The Supreme Court had observed that merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, a bail claim could not be rejected, and it was the court’s duty to assess the accused’s role in the present case and other circumstances like the possibility of fleeing.
Judge Tribhuwan, in his order, acknowledged the numerous previous crimes of a similar nature pending against the accused. However, he pointed out that the prosecution had not clarified if the accused had been convicted in any of those cases, stating that the mere pendency of criminal cases does not automatically classify someone as a habitual offender. In the present case, the stolen items had been recovered from the accused, and it appeared that most of the investigation was complete, with the accused having been in jail since December 19, 2023.
Relying on the cited case law, the nature of the offence, the punishment prescribed, and the specific facts of the present case, Judge Tribhuwan deemed it desirable to release the accused on bail, subject to stringent conditions.
The court thus ordered:
- Criminal Bail Application Allowed: Criminal Bail Application No. 36 of 2024 was allowed.
- Conditional Release: Applicants/accused No. 1 Vasim Shamasulah Chowdhary and No. 2 Zulfikar Bhondu Khan were ordered to be released on bail in Crime No. 475/2023 registered at Gamdevi Police Station, subject to the following conditions: i) Each applicant shall execute a personal bond of ₹20,000 with one or two sureties of a like amount. ii) Applicants shall not tamper with any prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly. iii) Applicants shall cooperate with the investigation agency and attend the concerned Gamdevi Police Station every Monday between 10:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. until the charge-sheet is filed. iv) Applicants shall not misuse their liberty. v) Applicants shall furnish their detailed address and mobile number to the Investigating Officer and the concerned court, and shall notify any change in their residence/address or mobile number to both.
- Bail Before Trial Court: The bail formalities are to be completed before the learned trial court.
- Information to Trial Court: The learned trial court is to be informed accordingly.
The order was directly dictated, checked, and signed by Additional Sessions Judge Shri N. P. Tribhuwan on January 8, 2024, and uploaded on the court’s record on January 9, 2024.
This decision to grant bail to individuals with such a significant history of similar offences raises eyebrows and highlights the judiciary’s emphasis on the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, even for repeat offenders, especially when the prosecution has not secured convictions in previous cases and the investigation in the current matter is largely complete. The stringent conditions imposed will be crucial in ensuring the accused’s cooperation with the ongoing legal process and preventing any potential threats to witnesses or further criminal activity. The case will now proceed to trial, where the evidence against the accused will be scrutinized.