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 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Surayya Begam Wajid Mujewar vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 14 July, 2025

2025:BHC-AUG:18339

                                                                         33-ABA-1104-2025.doc




                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                      ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1104 OF 2025

                                   Surayya Begam Wajid Mujewar
                                                Versus
                                   The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

                                       -------------------------
          Mr. Ram S. Shinde for the Applicant.
          Mr. A. M. Phule, APP for the State.
                                       -------------------------

                                                    CORAM :        ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
                                                    DATE :         14 JULY 2025

          P. C.:

          1.            The Applicant has filed the present Application as the Applicant

          apprehends arrest. These proceedings arise out of CR No.0122 of 2025. The

          FIR is lodged on 19 April 2025 at 20:28 hours by the Udgir City Police

          Station, Dist. Latur. The date of occurrence of the alleged incident as stated

          in the FIR is from 7 September 2022 to 30 December 2024. The FIR has

          been registered under Section 3(2) of the The Maharashtra Prevention and

          Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori

          Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013 ("The Black Magic Act") and Sections

          318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ("BNS"). There are

          two accused persons. The original accused No.1 is the Applicant before the

          Court, who is the sister of the original accused No.2. The Informant is one

          Asmatunnisa Jabbarodin Parkote. The brother-in-law of accused No.1 had

          got married with the daughter of the Informant.
          Shubham                                                                   Page 1 of 4
                                                           33-ABA-1104-2025.doc


2.           With the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties, I have

perused the FIR and record available with the Court. It appears from the FIR

that the alleged acts of black magic which fall under the provisions of the

Black Magic Act were performed between 7 September 2022 to 30

December 2024 on the Informant. The allegation is that during such acts,

the Informant has parted with substantial amounts of money as well as gold

and silver ornaments. The original accused No.2 i.e. Farida Yusuf Shaikh has

been arrested. There is some substance in the submissions of the learned

Advocate for the Applicant that the alleged occurrence of the incident where

such black magic was performed continuously for a period of two years.

There was no complaint in the interregnum period except for lodging of the

FIR that too belatedly on 19 April 2025. There is no explanation coming

forth from the prosecution in this regard for such gross and inordinate delay.

3.           At this juncture, Mr. Shinde would refer to the judgment of this

Court in the case of Vedika Nilesh Pai Vs. State of Maharashtra1 where the

Court had occasioned to deal with Section 3 of the Black Magic Act. The

Court made similar observations pertaining to the fact that the alleged

incident had taken place in September 2019, whereas the FIR was lodged on

December 2019. However, in the present case the delay in lodging the FIR

from the date of the alleged incident exceeds two years. The Applicant is a

lady and a homemaker. The Applicant undertakes to fully co-operate with


1 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 6633
Shubham                                                              Page 2 of 4
                                                            33-ABA-1104-2025.doc


the investigation.

4.            Mr. Phule, learned APP has strongly objected to the ABA and

submitted that the custodial interrogation of the Applicant is necessary in

the given facts and circumstances.

5.            A prima facie case is made out by the Applicant. The basic

ingredients of the offence alleged under the Black Magic Act read with the

BNS are not coming forth, qua this Applicant, at this stage. This is a case

where the disputes between the parties are essentially out of matrimonial

discord. In such factual complexion, custodial interrogation would serve no

purpose. Hence, in my view, the following order would meet the ends of

justice:-

                                     ORDER

(i) In the event of arrest of the Applicant in connection with CR No.0122 of 2025 registered with Udgir City Police Station, Dist. Latur for the offences punishable under Section 3(2) of the The Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013 and Sections 318(4) and 3(5) of the BNS, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.20,000 (Rupees Twenty Thousand Only) with one or more sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The Applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shall Shubham Page 3 of 4 33-ABA-1104-2025.doc attend the concerned police station as and when called by the Investigating Officer, until filing of the charge-sheet.

(iii) The Applicant shall furnish details of residential address and other contact details such as mobile number etc. to the concerned police station. If there is any change in the contact details, the same shall be immediately intimated to the concerned police station.

(iv) The Applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Court without prior permission/order of the Court, until the further orders.

(v) The Applicant shall not influence the witness/es and/or tamper evidence in any manner whatsoever.

6. Needless to mention that the observations made above are prima facie for the purposes of adjudicating this Application.

7. The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed in the above terms.

[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] Shubham Page 4 of 4