Mumbai, January 9, 2024 – The City Civil and Sessions Court at Greater Bombay has granted bail to two accused individuals, Vasim Shamasulah Chowdhary (47) and Zulfikar Bhondu Khan (37), who were arrested in connection with a theft case registered under Crime No. 277/2023 at Gamdevi Police Station. The bail order was issued by Additional Sessions Judge N.P. Tribhuwan on January 8, 2024, under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.).
Background of the Case
The case originated from a complaint filed on September 20, 2023, by businessman Jyotin Jaysukhlal Doshi, who runs a tours and travel agency named Gems Tours and Travels at Hughes Road, Mumbai. According to the complaint, between 1:00 p.m. on September 19 and 10:00 a.m. on September 20, unknown individuals allegedly broke into his office by forcing open the shutter and stole two laptops, three desktops, and cash amounting to ₹4,500. The total estimated loss was ₹66,000.
During the investigation, Chowdhary and Khan were arrested in another case, Crime No. 475/2023. During their interrogation, they reportedly confessed to committing multiple thefts, including the one in Crime No. 280/2023. Their criminal history revealed their involvement in numerous theft cases, including Crime Nos. 475/2023, 280/2023, 35/2023, and the present case (277/2023), all registered at Gamdevi Police Station. Additionally, they were linked to prior theft cases at Azad Maidan Police Station (Crime Nos. 270/2007 and 103/2014), as well as cases registered with DCB CID and D.B. Marg Police Station.
Defense Arguments and Court’s Observations
The defense counsel, Ms. Shagupta Shaikh, argued that the accused were falsely implicated and arrested merely on suspicion. She pointed out that two laptops and two desktops, initially reported stolen, were later found in the complainant’s office. The police had not recovered any stolen cash or goods from the accused. Furthermore, the defense contended that the accused had already spent considerable time in custody (since December 22, 2023) and that their custodial interrogation had been completed.
On the other hand, the prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Mrs. Ranjana Budhwant, opposed the bail plea, stating that the accused were habitual offenders with multiple pending cases. The prosecution feared that if released, they could tamper with witnesses or abscond from Mumbai, as they were not permanent residents of the city.
Court’s Ruling
The court acknowledged the accused’s criminal history but noted that the prosecution had not provided evidence of any prior convictions. Citing the Supreme Court judgment in Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs. State of U.P. (2012 SCC (Cri) 681), which stated that mere pending cases do not automatically establish someone as a habitual offender, the court granted bail to the accused. The court observed that since most of the stolen items were recovered and the accused had been in custody for over two weeks, further detention was unnecessary.
Bail Conditions
The court imposed the following conditions for granting bail:
- The accused must furnish a personal bond of ₹20,000 each, with one or two sureties of the same amount.
- They must not tamper with any prosecution witnesses, directly or indirectly.
- They must cooperate with the investigation and report to the Gamdevi Police Station every Monday between 10:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. until the charge sheet is filed.
- They must not misuse their liberty in any manner.
- They must provide their detailed address and mobile number to the investigating officer and the court. Any change in residence or contact details must be promptly reported.
Conclusion
The decision to grant bail highlights the court’s approach in balancing the gravity of criminal allegations with the rights of the accused. While acknowledging their past criminal records, the court emphasized that pending cases alone cannot justify prolonged detention without conviction. The case will now proceed as per legal due process, with the accused required to comply with all bail conditions.
