Mumbai, March 12, 2024 – In a significant development, the Additional Sessions Judge S.M. Tapkire at the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay granted conditional bail to eleven individuals who were arrested in connection with the mob violence that erupted outside the Ghatkopar Police Station on February 4, 2024. The common order, issued on March 5, 2024, addressed three separate bail applications: BA 482/2024, BA 483/2024, and BA 565/2024.

The eleven applicants were booked under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 353 (Assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty), 332 (Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty), 333 (Voluntarily causing grievous hurt to deter public servant from his duty), 341 (Wrongful restraint), 336 (Act endangering life or personal safety of others), 337 (Causing hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others), 338 (Causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others), 141 (Unlawful assembly), 143 (Punishment for being member of unlawful assembly), 145 (Joining or continuing in unlawful assembly, knowing that it has been commanded to disperse), 147 (Punishment for rioting), 149 (Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object), along with Section 7 of the Criminal Law (Amended) Act, 1932, and Sections 37(1), 37(3) with 135 of The Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

The incident occurred when the Gujarat State Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) brought Mufti Salman Azhari, a resident of Vikhroli, Mumbai, to the Ghatkopar Police Station in connection with a crime committed in Gujarat. Upon learning of his detention, a large number of his followers gathered outside the police station demanding his immediate release without any legal action. When their demands were not met, the mob allegedly turned violent, pelting stones at the police personnel and the police station premises, resulting in injuries to approximately 20 police officials. The entire incident was reportedly captured on video. Following technical investigation and analysis of the video recordings, 21 individuals, including the present applicants, were arrested for their alleged involvement in the violence.

In their bail applications, the accused argued that the FIR and the state’s reply did not contain any specific accusations against them. They claimed to have been arrested without proper reason, especially considering the presence of an estimated 900 to 1000 people at the scene, while only 21 arrests were made. They also pointed to the fact that three other co-accused had already been granted bail, arguing for parity. Furthermore, they contended that the available evidence did not constitute any alleged offense against them and that with the incident occurring on February 4, 2024, there was no further need for their custodial detention, as the primary witnesses were police personnel.

The State, represented by Ld. S.P.P. Kekanis and Ld. SPP Manisha J. Parmar, strongly opposed the bail, emphasizing the large gathering of 900 to 1000 followers who allegedly raised slogans and pelted stones at the police, injuring 20 personnel, some with fractures. The prosecution argued that the accused intentionally obstructed public servants in the discharge of their duties and created terror to pressure the police to release Mufti Azhari. They highlighted the seriousness of the crime and the ongoing investigation to identify and apprehend the remaining individuals involved.

After careful consideration of the arguments and the available records, Additional Sessions Judge S.M. Tapkire acknowledged the serious nature of the allegations regarding the attack on public servants during the discharge of their duty. However, the court also noted the applicants’ contention that neither the FIR nor the state’s reply specified the clear role and participation of each applicant in the alleged crime. The court further observed that during the custodial interrogation of the applicants, no specific discoveries, recoveries, or seizures were made.

Considering that sufficient time had already been available for the investigating machinery to interrogate the applicants and that the seizure during the spot panchanama was limited to 16 small stones and two pairs of footwear, the court opined that further custodial detention of the applicants was not essential for any significant reason.

While acknowledging the seriousness of the attack on public servants, the court found that the specific involvement and attributed role of each applicant in the commission of the alleged crime were not clearly articulated in the FIR or the state’s objections. Therefore, the court deemed it appropriate to grant bail to the eleven applicants, subject to stringent conditions.

The common order stipulated the following conditions for the bail of all eleven applicants:

a. Each applicant shall be released upon executing a Personal Recognizance (P.R.) Bond of ₹1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) and furnishing one or two solvent sureties of the like amount.

b. The applicants shall not tamper or hamper the prosecution witnesses and evidence in any manner.

c. The applicants shall record their attendance with the Ghatkopar Police Station every Tuesday of every week between 11:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. until the submission of the charge sheet.

d. The applicants shall attend every date of the trial without fail.

e. The applicants shall not indulge in any criminal activity.

f. The applicants shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Learned Trial Court.

g. The applicants shall submit their proper and verifiable residential address proof, as well as telephone and cell numbers, to the respondent for contact purposes.

h. The applicants shall ensure compliance with the surety requirements before the Learned Trial/Committal Court.

i. The order shall be communicated to the Learned Trial/Committal Court and the Investigating Officer/Ghatkopar Police Station.

j. The Ghatkopar Police Station shall take note of the order.

The court clarified that the present Criminal Bail Applications No. 482 of 2024, 483 of 2024, and 565 of 2024 stand disposed of accordingly.

This order grants conditional liberty to the eleven accused individuals, balancing their right to freedom with the need to ensure their cooperation with the ongoing investigation and the judicial process, while also acknowledging the state’s concern regarding the serious allegations of violence against public servants. The case will now proceed with the investigation and subsequent trial in the relevant court.