Mumbai, Maharashtra – April 18, 2022 – Monu Gorelal Shaikh, 28, and Mohammad Rafit Abdul Rahim Khatri @ Golu, 37, have been granted bail by the Sessions Court in Greater Mumbai in connection with a high-profile robbery case involving the theft of aluminum shuttering worth Rs. 7 lakhs. The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Dr. U.J. More, granted bail subject to stringent conditions, emphasizing the need for the accused to cooperate with the ongoing investigation and adhere to court directives.

The case, registered as Crime No. 86 of 2022 at Pant Nagar Police Station, pertains to a brazen robbery that occurred on February 16, 2022, at approximately 4:00 a.m. According to the prosecution, a group of 10-12 individuals, including Shaikh and Khatri, allegedly stormed a worksite, armed with swords, and proceeded to rob security guards and a supervisor. The assailants reportedly tied up the victims with ropes and forcibly removed 200 plates of aluminum shuttering, valued at Rs. 7 lakhs, using a truck or other vehicle. The case was registered under Sections 395 (dacoity), 411 (dishonestly receiving stolen property), read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Sections 4 and 27 of the Indian Arms Act, and Sections 37(1) and 135 of the Mumbai Police Act.

Shaikh and Khatri, represented by Advocate Jadhavar, sought bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arguing that there was insufficient material against them and that they were willing to cooperate with the investigation.

The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Patil, opposed the bail application, asserting that there was substantial evidence implicating the applicants and that the robbery appeared to be a pre-planned operation. They expressed concern that granting bail could hinder the investigation.

Judge More, however, granted bail to both Shaikh and Khatri, citing the recovery of the stolen property and the completion of the applicants’ police custody period. The court deemed it more appropriate to release the accused with strict conditions rather than continue their detention.

The court imposed the following comprehensive bail conditions:

• Personal Bond and Surety: Each applicant was ordered to execute a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and furnish one or two solvent sureties of the same amount.
• Provisional Cash Security: As an alternative to the surety bond, each applicant was permitted to provide a provisional cash security of Rs. 25,000/- for a period of one month.
• Police Station Attendance: Both applicants are required to attend Pant Nagar Police Station every Monday between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. until the filing of the chargesheet.
• Family and Work Details: The applicants must submit a list of at least three blood relatives with detailed residential and work addresses, along with documentary proof of the provided information.
• Address Change Notification: Both the applicants and their sureties are obligated to inform the police and the trial court of any changes in their residential addresses.
• Identification Documents: The applicants must provide copies of at least two identification documents, such as PAN card, Aadhaar card, ration card, electricity bill, voter ID, or property documents.
• Address Verification: The Investigating Officer is required to conduct physical verification of the applicants’ residential addresses to confirm the information provided.
• Witness Tampering Prohibition: The applicants are strictly prohibited from influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence.
• Travel Restriction: The applicants are not allowed to leave the territorial limits of Mumbai without prior permission from the court.
• Simultaneous Compliance: Conditions regarding family details, identification documents, and address verification must be complied with simultaneously with the furnishing of cash security or surety bond.
• Bail Execution: The bail is to be executed before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate.

The court’s decision highlights the delicate balance between individual liberty and the need to ensure the effective administration of justice. The imposition of stringent conditions underscores the court’s commitment to ensuring the applicants’ cooperation with the investigation and their presence during the trial, while acknowledging the completion of certain investigatory stages.