Mumbai, Maharashtra – May 18, 2022 – The Sessions Court for Greater Bombay has denied bail to Irfan Ali Shamshuddin Shah and Shahnawaz Shamshuddin Shah, accused in a violent assault case. Additional Sessions Judge R.M. Sadrani (C.R. No. 37) rejected Bail Application No. 919 of 2022, related to C.R. No. 279 of 2022 registered with L.T. Marg Police Station.
Irfan Ali Shamshuddin Shah, 29, and Shahnawaz Shamshuddin Shah, 24, were arrested and charged under Sections 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
Case Background:
The complainant, Manoj Devidas Kadam, reported that on April 11, 2022, he and his relatives were in Zaveri Bazar for wedding shopping. Around 8:00 PM, an altercation arose when Irfan Ali Shamshuddin Shah’s two-wheeler brushed against Sunil Chavan, a family member. Subsequently, Irfan Shah left the scene and returned with his associates, including Shahnawaz Shah and co-accused Ali Ahmed Karimulla Mujahid.
Two separate assault attempts were made on Kadam and his family. Ritesh, an intervener, was struck on the head with a bamboo stick by Ali Ahmed Karimulla Mujahid, causing grievous injury. Shahnawaz Shah allegedly assaulted with a waist belt.
Arguments and Court’s Reasoning:
Advocate Pawar, representing the applicants, argued that Section 307 of the IPC was not applicable. He stated that Irfan Shah’s role was limited to the vehicle incident, and Shahnawaz Shah’s role was confined to the alleged assault with a waist belt. He emphasized that the grievous injury was caused by co-accused Ali Ahmed Karimulla Mujahid.
The prosecution, represented by APP Pranjali Joshi, opposed the bail, arguing that Irfan Shah’s act of calling his associates indicated a pre-planned attack. The prosecution highlighted the serious head injury and the common intention of the accused. They also noted that the investigation was ongoing.
The court, after reviewing the FIR and hearing both sides, noted that the altercation was followed by Irfan Shah leaving and returning with the co-accused. “As per FIR itself, after giving dash of his two wheeler, there was altercation of words. Thereafter, applicant No.1 went from the spot and returned after sometimes with co-accused,” Judge Sadrani stated.
The court also emphasized the pre-planned nature of the attack and the grievous injury caused to the intervener. “Thereafter, there was assault on two occasions on informant and his family members at two different spots which shows that all the accused came there with pre-plan. There was assault on the vital part i.e. head causing grievous injury to the intervener,” Judge Sadrani noted.
The court also considered the ongoing investigation and the possibility of evidence tampering. “Investigation is in progress. There is possibility of tampering with the evidence. Considering all these facts, I am not inclined to allow the application,” Judge Sadrani concluded.
Decision:
Judge Sadrani rejected the bail application, citing the pre-planned nature of the attack, the grievous injury caused, and the ongoing investigation. The certified copy of the judgment was issued on May 18, 2022. This decision underscores the court’s consideration of the severity of the offense and the stage of the investigation when denying bail.