Tag: Bail Regular

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Aashish Satpute for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th January, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 29/01/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 29th January, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 07/02/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 7th February, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 01/03/2024 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 1st March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 15/03/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 19/03/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 19th March, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 15/04/2024 ( at 12:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Amit Icham for Applicant. Mr. Pandruang H. Gaikwad, APP for State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 15th April, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 06/05/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 6th May, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 01/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 20: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 1st July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 08/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 8th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 11/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Advait Tamhankar i/by Mr. Aashish Satpute for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State/Respondent. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 11th July, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 19/07/2024 ( at 2:30 pm). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 27: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 19th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 23/08/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 29: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Chaitanya Purankar i/by Mr. Amit Icham for Applicant. Mr. Pandurang H. Gaikwad, APP for State/Respondent. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 23rd August, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant , stand over to 13/09/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 33: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.161 OF 2024 Mohammed Farukh Mohammed Umar Tak ] Applicant vs. State of Maharashtra ] Respondent Mr.Advait Tamhankar i/b Aashish Satpute for the Applicant. Ms.Sangita Phad, APP for the State. CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J RESERVED ON : 23rd SEPTEMBER, 2024 PRONOUNCED ON : 3rd OCTOBER, 2024. P.C. : 1 The Applicant/Accused in Crime No.6/2022 registered with Pune ATS, is seeking regular bail. 2 The aforesaid offence is made punishable under Section 8(c), 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, (for short "NDPS Act"). 3 The Applicant, on secret inputs was apprehended on 02.05.2022 after having found in possession of 118 Grams of Mephedrone costing around Rs.11,80,000/-. The seizure carried out in the investigation of the aforesaid offence, is of commercial quantity. 4 In the aforesaid backdrop, the learned counsel for the Applicant while seeking regular bail would urge that the Respondent/Investigating Officer has failed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act. So as to substantiate the aforesaid contention, my attention is invited to the nature, the mode and manner in which the recovery was effected from the Applicant. The learned counsel would urge that since it is mandatory to follow the procedure laid down in the aforesaid provisions of the NDPS Act, the Applicant is entitled to be released on bail, as the recovery was neither effected by a Gazetted Officer, nor search. 5 The learned APP, while opposing the prayer for bail would urge that not only the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 50 read with 41 to 43 of the NDPS Act is complied with, but also the report of Chemical Analyser certifies the contraband seized from the Applicant, being banned substance. It is claimed that the Applicant is already charge-sheeted and there is enough iota of evidence to directly connect the Applicant to the crime. As such, it is urged that the Application is liable to be rejected. 2/4 6 Having appreciated the rival claims, it is appreciated that on specific inputs the Applicant was apprehended on 02.05.2022 at about 6.30 p.m. and he was sensitized about his right under Section 41, 42, 43 and 50. The written consent given by the Applicant for carrying out personal search by the Police Officer sufficiently speaks of compliance of the statutory mandate as provided under the NDPS Act. 7 Apart from above, the station diary entry was made about the offence and the same was immediately forwarded to the immediate superior by the Assistant Police Inspector. As such, there is compliance of Section 42, so also Section 50. 8 Apart from above, the quantity seized from the Applicant appears to be certified by the Chemical Analyser to be a banned substance under the NDPS Act. The said quantity is commercial in nature. In the aforesaid backdrop, prima-facie, no technical flaw could be noticed in the investigation against the Applicant. Perusal of the investigation papers depict that there is strong evidence available against the Applicant so as to infer his prima facie involvement in the offence in question and the offence being grave in nature, I see no reason to consider and grant the prayer for releasing the Applicant on bail. 9 Apart from above, the Courts below have consequently rejected his regular Bail Applications by recording the cogent reasons. In this background, the Application stands rejected. (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2164 OF 2024 The State of Maharashtra. … ------------------- Respondent V/s. Aslam @ Gondiya Hamid Mulla Applicant. Shri Farzan Shaikh i/b Kamil Sayyed, Advocate for Applicant. Shri Shreeram S. Chaudhari, APP for the State. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J. DATE : 13TH JUNE, 2024. PC: Heard. Issue notice to the respondent, returnable on 08/07/2024. The learned A.P.P. waives notice for the Respondent-State. RAJIV BABARAOJI RAUT Digitally signed by RAJIV BABARAOJI RAUT Date: 2024.06.14 14:49:18 +0530 (ANIL S. KILOR, J)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 2164 OF 2024 Aslam @ Gondiya Hamid Mulla APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL S. KILOR J DATE : 8th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 29/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2164 OF 2024 Aslam @ Gondiya Hamid Mulla, Age 34 years, Occ.Service, R/o.Hazarmachi, Tal.Karad, Dist.Satara. (Presently in Satara District Prison) Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Ganesh Bhujbal, Advocate for Applicant. Mr.Sameer M.Mangaonkar, APP, for State. Mr.Mahesh B.Shinde, P.C, Karad City Police, present. CORAM : ANIL S.KILOR, J. DATE : 21st August 2024 PC : Heard. By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the applicant is seeking bail in Crime No.1191 of 2023 registered with Karad City Police Station, District Satara, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 364, 324, 323, 143, 147, 148, 149, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for Applicant submits that there are discrepancies in the CCTV footage transcription and the statements of witnesses. It is submitted that the first informant did not name the Applicant. The FIR was registered against total 10 accused, out of which four were known and six unknown accused persons. It is submitted that version of the eye witness is doubtful and since charge sheet has been filed, further custody of the Applicant is not necessary. Accordingly he prays for grant of bail. MANISH SURESHRAO THATTE Digitally signed by MANISH SURESHRAO THATTE Date: 2024.08.22 18:12:26 +0530 Learned APP strongly opposed the application and grant of bail. I have gone through the charge sheet and relevant material collected by the Investigating Officer during investigation. It is evident that seeing the CCTV footage the Applicant was identified by the eye witness and there is sufficient evidence to show that at the time of incidence Applicant was present with other co-accused. The CCTV footage shows that the accused persons were assaulting the deceased. The allegations are of unlawful assembly with common intention. In the circumstances though there may be some discrepancies in the CCTV footage transcription and the statement of witness, however, presence of the Applicant at the spot with common intention cannot be prima facie disputed in view of sufficient incriminating material against the Applicant. In the circumstances since the offence is very serious, I do not find the present case as a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly it is rejected. Trial is expedited. Liberty is granted to move afresh before Trial Court after one year, if there is no progress in trial. Learned counsel for Applicant undertakes to place this order on the record of Trial Court within two weeks from today. (ANIL S.KILOR, J.) MST

Order - Status 4: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 6: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 8: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 9: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 10: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 12: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 16: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 18: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 21: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 22: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 23: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 26: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 28: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 30: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 32: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 35: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 37: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.241 OF 2024 Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari … Applicant versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent None for Applicant. Mrs. Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for State. CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J. DATE : 18 JANUARY 2024 P.C. None present for the Applicant. Learned APP makes a grievance that copy of the application has not been served on the Respondent-State. Learned Counsel for the Applicant shall serve copy of the application on the Respondent within one week. Stand over to 29 February 2024. ( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 241 OF 2024 Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR J DATE : 29th February, 2024 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 18/04/2024 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 241 OF 2024 Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR J DATE : 18th April, 2024 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 10/06/2024 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 241 OF 2024 Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE J DATE : 10th June, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 26/06/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 241 OF 2024 Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE J DATE : 26th June, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 25/07/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 241 OF 2024 Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE J DATE : 25th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 21/08/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 241 OF 2024 Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Adv. Afreen Shaikh for Applicant. ( Mentioned out of turn at. 2.30 p.m ) Mr. Prasanna P. Malshe, APP for State-Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE J DATE : 21st August, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 23/09/2024 ( H. O. B.). ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 241 OF 2024 Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE J DATE : 23rd September, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 11/10/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2442 OF 2024 Ahmed Abdul Kadir Ansari CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2442 OF 2024 Applicant Ahmed Abdul Kadir Ansari Applicant versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari versus WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO.241 OF 2024 Applicant Jainual Abdul Kadir Ansari … Applicant versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mrs. Mahalaxmi Ganapathy, APP for State. CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J. DATE : 1 OCTOBER 2024 P.C. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. Post on 4 October 2024 for passing orders. ( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )

Order - Status 22: Santosh Digitally signed by SANTOSH SUBHASH KULKARNI Date: 2024.10.04 19:55:25 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2442 OF 2024 Ahmed Abdul Kadir Ansari Versus ...Applicant The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO. 241 OF 2024 Jainul Abdul Kadir Ansari Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. Ankush Dhokale, for the Applicant in BA/2442/2024. Ms. Afreen Shaikh, for the Applicant in BA/241/2024. Smt. Mahalaxmi Ganapathy, APP for the State. CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED : $4^{text{th}}$ OCTOBER, 2024 ORDER:- 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The applicants, who are arraigned in CR No.522 of 2021, registered with Mankhurd Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 37(1) read with Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, have preferred these applications to enlarge them on bail. 3. Mohd. Hussain, the younger son of the first informant, had been to the mobile repair shop of Jainul Ansari (A1 - the 2-BA2442-2024+.DOC applicant in BA/241/2024). An altercation ensued with Ahmed Ansari (A2); (the applicant in BA/2442/2024), the brother of Jainul (A1), over replacing the display of the mobile phone handset. Jainul (A1) and Ahmed (A2) allegedly assaulted the Mohd. Hussain. The latter called the first informant. While the first informant was trying to defuse the situation and resolve the quarrel, her elder son Akbar (the deceased) came thereat on Activa Scooter. As the deceased questioned Jainul (A1) and Ahmed (A2) as to why Mohd. Hussain was assaulted, an altercation and fisticuffs ensued between the deceased and Jainul (A1). The latter allegedly picked up an iron rod and gave a blow on the chest of the deceased. While the deceased was trying to escape from the clutches of the accused by the Activa Scooter, Sarfraj (A3) and Irshad Hussain (A4) friends of Jainul (A1), accosted him. Irshad Hussain (A4) allegedly removed the key of the Scooter. Thereafter, applicant Ahmed (A2) gave a blow by means of knife on the thigh of the deceased. There was profuse bleeding and eventually the deceased succumbed to those injuries. Mr. Ankush Dhokale, the learned Counsel for Ahmed (A2) the applicant in BA/2442/2024, submitted that the incident 2-BA2442-2024+.DOC had occurred at the spur of the moment. Initial altercation was between the applicant and Mohd. Hussain. There was no premeditation. The applicant had allegedly given only one blow on the thigh. At any rate, the intention to cause the death cannot be attributed to the applicant. The applicant is a young boy and has been in custody since three years. Ms. Afreen Shaikh, the learned Counsel for Jainul (A1) the applicant in BA/241/2024, reiterated the submission that the incident had occurred at the spur of moment and without any premeditation. The presence of the deceased at the time and place of occurrence was a matter of chance. Ms. Shaikh further submitted that though the prosecution has alleged that the applicant had picked up a hot barbeque rod and assaulted the deceased, yet the injuries noted by the Autopsy Surgeon bely the said version as no burn or scalding mark was found on the person of the deceased. Inviting the attention of the Court to the postmortem report which indicates that the cause of death was 'shock and hemorrhage due to injury to left femoral vessels', Ms. Shaikh would urge that the said injury is not attributable to the applicant. Therefore, the applicant, who has been in custody since more than three years, deserves to be enlarged on bail. Smt. Ganapathy, the learned APP, stoutly resisted the prayer for bail. Smt. Ganapathy submitted that the complicity of the applicants is borne out by the statements of the eye witnesses. Over a trivial issue, the accused brutally assaulted the deceased. The injuries caused by both the applicants were sufficient to cause the death in the ordinary course of nature. Therefore, the applicants cannot be permitted to draw mileage from the fact that the cause of death was shock and hemorrhage due to injury to left femoral vessels. It was submitted that the weapons by means of which the applicants assaulted the deceased clearly manifest the intent with which the applicants perpetrated the assault. It was further submitted that pursuant to the discovery made by the applicants the weapons of offence have been recovered. Since there is a very strong prima facie case against the applicants, they do not deserve to be enlarged on bail. I have perused the report under Section 173 of the Code, especially, the statements of the first informant Mohd. Hussain, Ashraf Kureshi and Asif Ahmed Shaikh. Evidently, the quarrel took place over a trivial issue. The deceased was not a party to the initial altercation. The deceased came in the frame after the first informant reached the mobile shop of Jainul (A1). After the deceased questioned Jainul (A1) and Ahmed (A2), it seems, the quarrel escalated and both the applicants allegedly assaulted the deceased. Prima facie, the witnesses have stated that Jainul (A1) assaulted the deceased by means of barbeque rod and, after the deceased attempted to escape from the clutches of the accused, Ahmed (A2) gave a blow by means of a knife on the thigh of the deceased. The injuries noted by the Autopsy Surgeon lend prima facie support to the ocular account of the witnesses. At this stage, the fact that there was no burn or scalding mark on the person of the deceased does not detract materially from the prosecution version. Prima facie, there is material to indicate that the deceased met homicidal death. The submission on behalf of the applicants that the incident was not premeditated, however, carries some substance. As noted above, the initial altercation was between the applicant Mohd. Hussain, the brother of the deceased. Even Jainul (A1) allegedly picked up a barbeque rod from the adjoining food stall. It is not the case that any of the applicants was already armed or mounted the assault after preparation. The Postmortem Report indicates that the cause of death was,'shock and hemorrhage due to injury to left femoral vessels'. As noted above, Ahmed (A2) gave a single blow by means of knife on the thigh of the deceased. Prima facie, the primary cause of death of the deceased was that, on account of the knife blow, the femoral vessels were cut. In the backdrop of the aforesaid nature of the medical evidence, the submission on behalf of the applicants that the offence may not fall within the dragnet of Section 302 of the Penal Code is required to be appreciated. As a single knife blow on a part of the body, which cannot be said to be vital, was inflicted, the pivotal question that would warrant adjudication at the trial would be, whether the offence would fall within the tentacles of Section 302 or 304 of the Penal Code. 13. Mr. Dhokale, the learned Counsel for Ahmed (A2), placed reliance on an order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Sk. Zuber s/o Sk. Dastagir vs. State of Maharashtra 1 , wherein in a somewhat similar fact-situation, this Court was persuaded to enlarge the accused on bail. The observations in paragraph 5 read as under: "5. In case at hand, solitary blow was given by the applicant to the deceased at his left thigh-non-vital part which has caused cut of femoral vessel. By any stretch of imagination, one cannot say that the applicant knew the location of femoral vessel and its fatal result on its cut. As per prosecution case, other four accused had caught hold the victim, meaning thereby, victim was made defenseless still the applicant gave a single blow that too on thigh instead of other vital parts of the 1 Cri. Application (BA) No.395/2021. body which is factor to be weighed in favour of the applicant. Concededly while dealing with the bail application, the Court is not expected to martial material nor to express decisive opinion about the occurrence. However, it is open to form prima facie view if the facts are Order 20 BA 395 apparent and clear. In the above circumstances, on prima facie basis intention to kill cannot be gathered. The investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed. The applicant is young body aged 23 years. Trial will take considerable time for its disposal." In the case of Harjinder Singh vs. Delhi Administration 2 , the accused therein had inflicted an injury on the upper portion of left thigh of the deceased. In that context, it was held that it cannot be said with any definiteness that the accused aimed the blow at the particular part of the thigh knowing that it would cut the artery. It was, therefore, not possible to apply Clause 3 of Section 300 to the act of the accused. 15. In the case of Gokul Parashram Patil vs. State of Maharashtra 3 , wherein a single knife blow was inflicted above left clavicle cutting superior venacava, the Supreme Court observed as under: "4. ..... The solitary blow given by the appellant to the deceased was on the left clavicle - a non-vital part - and it would be too much to say that the appellant knew that the superior venacava would be cut as a result of that wound. Even a medical man perhaps may not have been able to judge the location of the superior venacava with any precision of that type. The fact that the venacava was cut must, therefore, be ascribed to a non- intentional or accidental circumstance. This was precisely the view taken in Harjinder Singh v. Delhi Administration, by Sikri, J., and in Laxman Kalu Nikalje v. The State of Maharashtra, by Hidayatullah, C.J. In the former 2 AIR 1968 Supreme Court 867. 3 (1981) 3 Supreme Court Cases 331. of these cases, the injury in question was a stab wound on the left thigh which had cut the femoral artery and vessels. In the latter, the damage caused consisted of a cut in the auxiliary artery and veins. In each of the two cases it was held that although the injury which was found to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death had resulted from a blow with a sharp-edged weapon, the same could not be said to have been intended, that the only injury which could be regarded as intentional was the superficial wound resulting directly from the blow, that the assailant could not be held guilty of an offence under section 302 of the Code and that he was, on the other hand, guilty of a lesser offence falling under part II of section 304 thereof." In view of the aforesaid position in law, the aspect of complicity of the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Penal Code appears to be a matter for adjudication at the trial. To add to this, it appears that the incident had occurred at the spur of the moment and there was no premeditation. Investigation is complete. The applicants are in custody since more than three years. It is extremely unlikely that the trial can be concluded within a reasonable period. I am, therefore, inclined to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicants. Hence, the following order: : O R D E R : (i) Applications stand allowed. (ii) Ahmed Abdul Kadir Ansari, the applicant in BA/2442/2024 and Jainul Abdul Kadir Ansari, the applicant in BA/241/2024, be released on bail in CR No.522 of 2021, registered with Mankhurd Police Station, on furnishing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, each, to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge. (iii) The applicants shall mark their presence at Mankhurd Police Station on the first Monday of every alternate month between 11.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. for a period of two years or till conclusion of trial, whichever is earlier. (iv) The applicants shall not enter the limits of Mankhurd Police Station for a period of three years or till the conclusion of the trial, whichever is earlier, except for attending the police station on the scheduled dates. (v) The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and/or give threat or inducement to the first informant and any of the persons acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to the Court or any police officer. (vi) On being released on bail, the applicants shall furnish their contact number and residential address to the investigating officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change. (vii) The applicants shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court. (viii) By way of abundant caution, it is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are confined for the purpose of determination of entitlement for bail and they may not be construed as an expression of opinion on the guilt or otherwise of the applicant and co-accused and the trial court shall not be influenced by any of observations made hereinabove. Applications disposed. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.125 OF 2025 Danish Hanif Shaikh .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent .................... Ms. Sakshi Mane, Advocate for Applicant. Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for Respondent – the State of Maharashtra. ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JANUARY 15, 2025 P.C . : 1. Mentioned out of turn. 2. Heard Ms. Mane, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Bajoria, learned APP for Respondent – the State of Maharashtra. 3. This is an Application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.408 of 2023 registered with Shil Diaghar Police Station, Thane for offence under Sections 376(2)(n), 328 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. 4. Issue notice to private Respondent No.2. Ms. Bajoria, learned APP for Respondent No.1 – the State of Maharashtra waives service on behalf of State of Maharashtra. 5. Humdast permitted. In addition to Court's notice, Applicant is directed to serve and inform Respondent No.2 about the next date of hearing by any permissible mode of service and file appropriate affidavit of service with tangible proof thereof. 6. Private Respondent can through the Investigating Officer of the case inform whether she requires legal representation. Concerned Investigating Officer shall also convey this order to the Private Respondent who is now major through a lady Police Officer and file appropriate report to that effect on information received from Private Respondent No.2. Copy of Application shall be served on Complainant through Investigating Officer within a period of two weeks from today. 7. Stand over to 22 nd January, 2025. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Digitally signed by HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Date: 2025.01.15 18:15:45 +0530

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JANUARY 22, 2025. P.C.: 1. Due to paucity of time, the following matters are adjourned to future dates as follows:- Serial No. Adjourned date 2, 6, 7, 41, 43, 44, 46, 48 to 51, 53 to 63, 65, 67 to 75 and 77 to 90 24th February 2025 91 to 98 25th February 2025 2. In the meanwhile, ad-interim / interim relief, if any, granted earlier to continue. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Ajay AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Digitally signed by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date: 2025.01.23 10:49:41 +0530

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.125 OF 2025 Danish Hanif Shaikh .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent .................... Ms. Sakshi Mane, Advocate for Applicant. Ms. Mahalakshmi Ganpathy, APP for Respondent State of Maharashtra. ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : JANUARY 28, 2025 P.C . : 1. Heard Ms. Mane, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Ganpathy, learned APP for Respondent – State of Maharashtra. 2. This is an Application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.408 of 2023 registered with Shil Daighar Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 328 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 67 of the Information and Technology Act, 2000. 3. Applicant is directed to serve Respondent No.2 as remark shows that 'spare copies has not been supplied'. Let spare copies be supplied to Department and service be effected within a period of one week from today. 4. Stand over to 04 th February, 2025. To be placed under the caption 'Medical Urgency'. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Digitally signed by HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Date: 2025.01.28 14:29:37 +0530

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 125 OF 2025 Danish Hanif Shaikh .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents .................... Ms. Sakshi S. Mane for Applicant Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for State Mr. Santosh V. Chavan, API, Shil Daighar Police Station, Thane is present ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 04, 2025 P. C . : 1. Heard. 2. In view of the directions contained in paragraph No. 6 of the order dated 15.01.2025, Respondent No. 2 has consented for appointment of Advocate through legal aid to espouse and represent her case. In that view of the matter, I direct High Court Legal Services Committee to appoint Ms. Kavisha Khanna, learned Advocate practicing as Advocate in this Court (Contact No. 9619197448) to represent and espouse the cause of Respondent No. 2 through the Legal Aid. High Court Legal Services Committee shall give appointment letter to her to that effect. 3. Copy of the Bail Application shall be handed over to the Appointed Advocate by learned Advocate for Applicant immediately. 4. Stand over to 18th February, 2025 Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] RAVINDRA MOHAN AMBERKAR Digitally signed by RAVINDRA MOHAN AMBERKAR Date: 2025.02.04 14:34:06 +0530 2 of 2

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 18, 2025 P.C . : 1. Due to paucity of time, the following matters are adjourned to future dates as follows:- Serial Nos. Adjourned date 37 to 50, 52, 53 and 55 to 60 25th February, 2025 61 to 80 26th February, 2025 81 to 100 27th February, 2025 101 to 117 28th February 2025 2. In the meanwhile, ad-interim relief, if any, granted earlier to continue. Ajay [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Digitally signed by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date: 2025.02.18 15:01:05 +0530 Ajay

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 28, 2025 P.C . : 1. Due to paucity of time, the following matters are adjourned to future dates as follows:- Serial Nos. Adjourned date 36 to 50 04th April 2025 51 to 70 07th April 2025 71 to 90 08th April 2025 91 to 99, 101 to 108, 110 to 112 and 114 09th April 2025 2. In the meanwhile, ad-interim relief, if any, granted earlier to continue. Ajay [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Digitally signed by AJAY TRAMBAK UGALMUGALE Date: 2025.03.01 13:09:10 +0530

Order - Status 15: HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.125 OF 2025 Danish Hanif Shaikh .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents .................... Ms. Sakshi Mane, Advocate for Applicant. Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for Respondent No.1. CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : MARCH 05, 2025 P.C . : 1. Heard Ms. Mane, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Bajoria, learned APP for Respondent No.1. ................... 2. Prima facie, it is seen that Application has been ingeniously moved on medical grounds so that it can be listed and get priority hearing and it is sought to be argued on merits. 3. Be that as it may, I would like to ascertain the medical status of Applicant from Chief Medical Officer of Prison Hospital where the Applicant is lodged whether Applicant is indeed suffering from Tuberculosis. I am informed by Ms. Mane that Applicant is lodged in Thane Central Prison. 4. Chief Medical Officer of Thane Central Prison shall make appropriate report about the medical status of Applicant to inform the Court within a period of one week after which further directions will be passed. 5. Stand over to 12 th March, 2025. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Order - Status 17: HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : MARCH 12, 2025 P.C . : 1. Due to paucity of time, the following matters are adjourned to a future dates as follows:- Serial Nos. Adjourned date 32, 38, 41, 44, 46, 48, 49, 53, 55, 56, 57, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70 and 72. 05th May, 2025 73, 81, 82, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 92, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103 06th May, 2025 2. In the meanwhile, ad-interim relief, if any, granted earlier to continue. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Digitally signed by HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Date: 2025.03.13 12:17:45 +0530

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 125 OF 2025 Danish Hanif Shaikh ....APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT Ms. Sakshi Mane for Applicant Ms. Kavisha Khanna for Respondent No.2 Ms. Megha Bajoria, APP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV J DATE : 8th April, 2025 P.C. : S. O. to 13/06/2025 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 125 OF 2025 Danish Hanif Shaikh APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR J DATE : 13th June, 2025 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 08/07/2025 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 23: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 125 OF 2025 Danish Hanif Shaikh APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT Ms. Sakshi S. Mane for the Applicant. Ms. Kavisha Khanna (Appointed as legal aid counsel) for Respondent No. 2. Mrs. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for Respondent / State. Mr. Niteen Belge, Shil Daighar Police Station, Thane City is present. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR J DATE : 27th June, 2025 P.C. : S. O. to 08/07/2025 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLN. NO. 125 OF 2025 Danish Hanif Shaikh APPLICANT V/S The State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR J DATE : 8th July, 2025 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 18/08/2025. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )