Mumbai, February 9, 2024: In a significant development, the Additional Sessions Court of Greater Mumbai granted bail to two accused, Mr. Majid Idris Khan (28) and Mr. Subin Hakam Khan (32), both drivers by profession and residents of Rajasthan, who were arrested in connection with Crime No. 30/2024 registered by the Govandi Police Station. The duo had been charged under Sections 328, 188, 272, 273 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act. The Court found no substantial evidence under Section 328 IPC, which deals with causing harm through poison or intoxicants.

Court Proceedings and Arguments

Presiding over the case, Hon’ble Additional Sessions Judge Shri A. A. Kulkarni (C.R. No.22) heard arguments from both sides. The defense counsel, Mr. Sharif Shaikh, contended that the allegations in the FIR did not satisfy the conditions required for an offence under Section 328 IPC. He argued that his clients were not directly linked to the alleged offence, and the other charges against them were bailable. Further, he assured the Court that his clients were prepared to cooperate fully with the investigation.

On the other hand, the prosecution, represented by APP Mr. J. N. Surywanshi, opposed the bail application, stating that the investigation was ongoing and custodial interrogation was necessary.

Court’s Observations and Order

After perusing the case records, the Court noted that the FIR did not indicate any harm caused to any individual, a fundamental requirement for invoking Section 328 IPC. Since all other charges were bailable and the banned substances had already been seized by the police, the Court found no reason to keep the accused in prolonged detention. Consequently, the Court allowed the bail application on the following conditions:

1. Personal Bond and Surety: The accused were directed to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 each, along with one or two sureties of the same amount.
2. Police Cooperation: The accused must report to the Govandi Police Station whenever required by the investigating officer.
3. Court Attendance: The accused are mandated to attend all court proceedings related to the trial.
4. Address Verification: The accused must submit proof of residence, contact details, and Aadhaar card details of two close relatives to the investigating officer.
5. No Tampering with Evidence: The accused are prohibited from influencing or threatening any witnesses in the case.
6. Travel Restrictions: The accused cannot leave India without prior permission from the Court.

Legal and Public Implications

This order sets an important precedent regarding the applicability of Section 328 IPC in cases where there is no clear evidence of harm caused. The judgment underscores the principle that stringent charges should not be applied indiscriminately without factual basis.

The case also highlights the need for thorough investigation before booking individuals under serious sections of the IPC. By granting bail, the Court has upheld the rights of the accused while ensuring that justice is served in a fair and balanced manner.

Next Steps

The accused will now be released upon compliance with bail conditions, and the trial will proceed as per the court’s schedule. The prosecution is expected to present further evidence to support its case, while the defense will continue to argue for the innocence of the accused. The final outcome of the case remains to be seen, but this development marks a crucial step in the legal proceedings.

With the Court’s detailed reasoning, legal experts believe this ruling may influence future cases involving similar charges, ensuring a more judicious application of criminal law. The accused and their families have expressed relief, while authorities continue their efforts in investigating the matter further.