Mumbai, Maharashtra – May 4, 2022 – Chand Vasim Pathan, accused in an attempt to murder case, has been denied bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay. Additional Judge G.B. Gurao (C.R. 17) rejected Criminal Bail Application No. 861 of 2022, related to C.R. No. 64/2022 registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station.

Pathan was arrested and charged under Sections 307 (attempt to murder), 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke¹ breach of the peace), 506 (criminal intimidation) read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and² under Sections 37(1)(A) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.

Case Background:

The complainant, a rickshaw driver residing in Govandi, reported that Pathan had previously committed theft at his sister Malti Devdar’s house. On February 22, 2022, while the complainant and his friend Sajid were walking, they saw Pathan quarreling with his wife. When they asked Pathan to let them pass, he became angry and called his brother Vasu.

Vasu accused the complainant of falsely implicating Pathan in the previous theft case. Subsequently, Pathan allegedly assaulted the complainant with a knife on his chest and back. When Sajid intervened, Pathan also assaulted him on his forearm. Pathan then threatened bystanders who had gathered at the scene. The complainant was admitted to Sion Hospital.

Arguments and Court’s Reasoning:

Pathan’s counsel, Adv. Zoheb Shaikh, argued that his client was innocent, a co-accused had been granted bail, the weapon had been seized, and Pathan had no prior criminal record. He also stated that Pathan was willing to abide by any conditions imposed by the court.

The prosecution, represented by APP Ramesh Siroya, opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offense and the ongoing investigation. They expressed concerns that Pathan would intimidate witnesses if released.

The court acknowledged that a co-accused, Vasu, had been granted bail and another accused, Sarvari, had been granted anticipatory bail. However, the court emphasized that Pathan’s role was distinct. “However, the role of the present accused is different. It is specific alleged that present accused assaulted to complainant by knife on his chest and back. Complainant was admitted in Sion hospital. Therefore, principle of parity does not apply to the present accused,” Judge Gurao stated.

The court also highlighted the ongoing investigation and the threats made by Pathan. “In the FIR it has specifically stated that accused had threatened to the people gathered on the spot and told that, “vxj dksbZ chp es vk;k rks dkV Mkyqaxk- ”. There is every possibility that if, at this juncture, bail is granted to the accused then, he will pressurize to complainant and witnesses. Hence, he is not entitled for bail,” Judge Gurao concluded.

Decision:

Judge Gurao rejected Pathan’s bail application, citing his specific role in the assault, the ongoing investigation, and concerns about witness intimidation.

The certified copy of the judgment was issued on May 4, 2022. This decision highlights the court’s consideration of the accused’s specific role in the alleged offense and the potential for witness intimidation when denying bail in a serious assault case.