Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 1]

Bombay High Court

Rahmat Yusuf Pathan vs The State Of Maharashtra on 1 February, 2023

Author: M. S. Karnik

Bench: M. S. Karnik

                             Urmila Ingale                                   16. BA 656.22.doc


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
          Digitally signed             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
URMILA by URMILA
       PRAMOD
PRAMOD INGALE
INGALE Date:
       2023.02.01
          20:06:26 +0530                 BAIL APPLICATION NO.656 OF 2022

                             Rahmat Yusuf Pathan                    ..Applicant
                                  VS.
                             The State of Maharashtra               ..Respondent


                             Mr. Raju Suryawanshi, for the Applicant.
                             Ms. A. A. Takalkar, APP for the State.
                             Mr. Pandurang S. Sable, API, MFC Police Station, Thane City
                             present.


                                                    CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.

                                                    DATE     : FEBRUARY 1, 2023

                             P.C. :

                             1.     Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned

                             APP.

                             2.     This is an application for bail in respect of C.R.No. I-

                             518 of 2020 dated 19/10/2020 registered with Mahatma

                             Phule Chowk Police Station for the offence punishable under

                             sections 307, 326, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860

                             and sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act.

                             3.     The date of the incident is 18/10/2020. The applicant

                             was arrested on 24/04/2021.         The applicant is not the


                                                                                           1/4
 Urmila Ingale                                    16. BA 656.22.doc


assailant. One of the assailant has been released on bail.

It is alleged that 2 co-accused assaulted the complainant

with a sharp edged weapon.              It is alleged that the

complainant and the present applicant had dispute for

several years and therefore the complainant suspected that

it is the present applicant who is behind the assault on him.

So far as the accusations in the charge-sheet is concerned,

the witnesses at page nos. 90 & 94 have stated that they

have seen the applicant along with the assailant on the

same day 15 minutes prior to the incident. However, they

could not overhear the conversation.        The applicant is in

custody for more than 1 year and 10 months. The trial is

likely to take long time to conclude.

4.    The investigation is complete.       The charge-sheet is

filed. There are criminal antecedents reported against the

applicant. The applicant has been acquitted in as many as

6 cases which were registered under the various provisions

of the IPC including section 302 and under the provisions of

the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 .

5.      For seeking release on bail and having regard to the


                                                               2/4
 Urmila Ingale                                            16. BA 656.22.doc


incident, learned counsel for the applicant on instructions

submitted that the applicant is willing to reside outside the

area of Mumbai and Thane district.

6.    Learned       APP   submitted    that   the    applicant         was

absconding and ultimately he was arrested on 24/04/2021.

It is further submitted that even co-accused-Sanjay Singh

who was released on Covid bail is still absconding. Taking

an overall view of the matter, the applicant can be enlarged

on bail, however, it is necessary to impose stringent

conditions.       Hence, the following order.

                                ORDER

(a) The application is allowed.

(b) The applicant -Rahmat Yusuf Pathan in connection with C.R.No.518 of 2020 dated 19/10/2020 registered with Mahatma Phule Chowk Police Station shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.

(c) The statement of the learned counsel for the applicant on instructions that the applicant shall not enter the area of Mumbai and Thane district till the trial is concluded, except for the purpose 3/4 Urmila Ingale 16. BA 656.22.doc of attending the trial and the investigating officer, is accepted.

(d) It is submitted that the applicant will be residing at Raigad district. The applicant to furnish his residential address to the investigating officer and the trial Court while residing at Raigad and shall keep him updated, if there is any change.

(e) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer. The applicant should not tamper with evidence.

(f) The applicant to report to the nearest police station to the place of his residence while at Raigad once in a week on every Sunday, between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m.

(h) The applicant to report to the investigating officer once in a month on every first Monday of the week commencing from March 2023 between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m.

7. The application is disposed of.

(M. S. KARNIK, J.) 4/4