Mumbai, January 19, 2024: In a significant ruling, the Sessions Court of Greater Mumbai has denied bail to Ibrahim Naeem Khan, a 41-year-old worker accused of theft under Sections 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 147 of the Indian Railway Act. The case, registered with Kurla Railway Police Station under C.R. No. 1688/2023, has seen the accused in judicial custody since October 12, 2023.
Presiding over the matter in Court Room No. 30, Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh A. Sasne rejected the bail application, citing the applicant’s extensive criminal record and history of repeated offenses. The ruling was delivered on January 17, 2024, with the official order signed and uploaded on January 19, 2024.
Defense Arguments
Advocate Smita Pawar, representing the accused, contended that her client was falsely implicated and had no involvement in the alleged crime. She emphasized that Khan had already undergone custodial interrogation and was the sole earning member of his family. The defense also stressed that Khan had no prior criminal antecedents and that his continued detention was unnecessary.
Prosecution’s Opposition
Special Public Prosecutor Iqbal Solkar, appearing for the State, strongly opposed the bail plea. The prosecution argued that Khan was a habitual offender with multiple convictions in similar cases. The police investigation revealed that he had nine prior convictions, and four additional cases of a similar nature were still pending against him. The prosecution further contended that granting bail to the accused could lead to witness intimidation and evidence tampering.
The prosecution also highlighted the Metropolitan Magistrate’s earlier findings, which had identified Khan as a repeat offender prone to engaging in criminal activities. Given his past record and the likelihood of him committing similar offenses if released, the court found no reason to reconsider his bail plea.
Court’s Decision
After reviewing the submissions from both sides, the court concluded that there was no change in circumstances that warranted bail. The judge noted that Khan’s history of theft-related offenses indicated a pattern of criminal behavior, making him a threat to society.
In his ruling, Judge Sasne emphasized that releasing Khan could result in him reoffending, absconding, or interfering with the ongoing investigation. Accordingly, the bail application was dismissed, reinforcing the judiciary’s firm stance on habitual offenders.
Legal Implications
The rejection of Khan’s bail application underscores the court’s commitment to upholding the law and preventing repeat offenders from exploiting legal provisions. The case also highlights the judiciary’s efforts to maintain public safety by ensuring that individuals with a history of criminal behavior are not prematurely released.
With this ruling, law enforcement agencies continue their efforts to crack down on habitual offenders, ensuring that justice is served while safeguarding the rights of victims and witnesses.
Next Steps
As of now, Ibrahim Naeem Khan remains in judicial custody. Legal experts anticipate that his legal team may explore further remedies, including an appeal to a higher court. However, given his extensive criminal record, securing bail in the near future remains uncertain.