Mumbai, Maharashtra – April 11, 2022 – A Mumbai Sessions Court has rejected the bail application of Mannanali Zahir Mulla, accused in a murder case. The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge B.V. Wagh, denied bail citing the prima facie involvement of the accused in the serious crime and the circumstances surrounding the incident.
Mannanali Zahir Mulla (42) was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 385/2021, registered at Wadala T.T. Police Station, for offenses punishable under sections 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder), 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 5041 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of2 the Indian Penal Code (IPC).3
Details of the Allegations:
According to the prosecution, on November 5, 2021, at around 3:00 AM, the complainant’s son, Rohit, was waylaid and abused by two individuals. Rohit informed his brother, Amit, who went to confront the accused. During the confrontation, the accused allegedly assaulted Amit with a stick and an iron rod, causing him to lose consciousness. Amit was taken to Sion Hospital. Initially, the crime was registered under sections 326, 323, 504, 506, and 34 of the IPC. Later, section 307 was added due to the severity of the injuries. Amit succumbed to his injuries on November 14, 2021, and section 302 was added.
Arguments Presented During the Bail Hearing:
Advocate Anil Bansode, representing Mulla, argued that his client was falsely implicated. He claimed that there was only one eyewitness who stated that Mulla assaulted the deceased with a bamboo stick, while the co-accused used an iron rod. He emphasized that the deceased died on November 14, 2021, from septicemia with a head injury, and argued that Mulla’s role was not as grave as that of the co-accused. He also mentioned that the charge sheet had been filed and that there were no criminal antecedents against Mulla.
APP Ratnavali Patil, representing the prosecution, opposed the bail, stating that the quarrel was initiated by Mulla and that he had inflicted a bamboo stick injury on the deceased’s head before the co-accused used an iron rod. She also mentioned the recovery of the stick at Mulla’s instance and argued that releasing him on bail could lead to witness tampering.
Court’s Reasoning and Decision:
Judge Wagh, after hearing both sides and reviewing the charge sheet, noted that this was a successive bail application.
“This being successive bail plea of the applicant. In the wee hours of 5.11.2021, the informant’s son Rohit was way laid by the applicant and co-accused and hurl abuses. Later on, deceased and informant came to the applicant and reasoned him. At that time, applicant and co-accused assaulted the deceased with stick and iron rod. Notably, the deceased was armless,” Judge Wagh stated in the order.
The court rejected the defense’s argument that the offense did not constitute murder, stating that the assault occurred at a secluded place during the wee hours and that the intention or knowledge to commit the death of the deceased was a matter of evidence.
“According to Ld. Advocate for the applicant, the alleged prosecution case though accepted as it is, did not constitute the offence of the murder. According to him, the applicant did not possess any intention or knowledge to do away the deceased. The said submission is not impressed for the reason that applicant and co-accused assaulted the deceased at secluded place during the wee hours. Whether they possess requisite intention or knowledge to commit death of deceased is a matter of evidence,” Judge Wagh noted.
The court also stated that the mere filing of the charge sheet did not change Mulla’s role in the crime.
“Mere filing of charge-sheet, did not change the role of the applicant. Considering the prima facie involvement of the applicant in the serious nature of the crime, dissuaded this Court to release him on bail. Eventually, applicant is not entitled for bail,” Judge Wagh concluded.
Decision:
The court rejected Mulla’s bail application, citing his prima facie involvement in the serious crime.
Implications of the Decision:
This decision highlights the court’s stringent approach in murder cases, especially when there is prima facie evidence of the accused’s involvement. The court emphasized the circumstances surrounding the incident, the severity of the crime, and the need to consider the intention or knowledge of the accused, which are matters to be determined during trial. The ruling also underscores that the mere filing of a charge sheet does not automatically entitle an accused to bail, especially in serious offenses.