Bombay High Court
Imran Shakki Mehfuz Khan vs The State Of Maharashtra on 11 February, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:2372
1 25) Apeal 06-2026 111
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO. 11 OF 2026
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 06 OF 2026
IMRAN @ SHAKKI S/O. MAHFUJALI KHAN
VS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order
and Registrar's orders.
Shri A.S.Manohar, Advocate for appellant/applicant.
Ms. S.S. Dhote, APP for respondent/State.
CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
DATE : 11/02/2026
This is an application for suspension of sentence
imposed by the learned Special Judge and Additional
Sessions Judge, Gondia, in Special (MCOCA) Case No.
103/2020, dated 18/11/2025, convicting and sentencing
the Applicant/Appellant as follows:-
" Accused No. 1 to 5 and 7 to 9 are hereby convicted as per
Sec. 235(2) of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section
147, 148, 307 r/w 149, 397, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code,
1860, Sec. 39 r/w 192 of Motor Vehicle Act and Sec. 3(1)(ii),
3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act,
1999 in Crime No. 159/2016 registered with Police Station,
Rawanwadi, Dist. Gondia.
2. However, offence committed by accused persons fell within
ambit of MCOC Act, 1999 as well, therefore in view of
discussion made aforesaid conviction under MCOC Act will
prevail over charges under IPC and M.V. Act. Hence, for the
offence punishable under Sec. 3(1) (ii) of MCOC Act, 1999
accused Nos. 1 to 5 & 7 to 9 are sentenced to suffer rigorous
2 25) Apeal 06-2026 222
imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs.5,00,000/-
(Five Lakhs) each, in default of payment of fine to suffer
further S/I for Six months.
3. For the offence punishable under Sec. 3(2) of MCOC Act,
1999 accused Nos. 1 to 5 & 7 to 9 are sentenced to suffer
rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of
Rs.5,00,000/- (Five Lakhs) each, in default of payment of fine
to suffer further S/I for Six months.
4. For the offence punishable under Sec. 3(4) of MCOC Act,
1999 accused Nos. 1 to 5 & 7 to 9 are sentenced to suffer
rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of
Rs.5,00,000/- (Five Lakhs) each, in default of payment of fine
to suffer further S/I for Six months.
5. All the sentences to run concurrently.
6. Accused No.1 to 5 and 7 to 9 are entitled for set-off for the
detention already undergone by them as per the provisions of
Sec.428 of Cr.P.C.
7. ..... .
(i) ...
(ii) ......
8. For want of notification, accused No.1 to 5 and 7 to 9 are
acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 135 of
Bombay Police Act.
9. For want of notification and sanction for prosecution under
Arms Act, accused No. 1 to 5 & 7 to 9 are acquitted of the
offene punishable under Section 3, 4 r/w 25 of Indian Arms
Act.
10. Accused No. 1 to 5 & 7 to 9 are acquitted of the offence
punishable under Sec. 9 r/w 51 of Wild Life Protection Act.
11. .....
3 25) Apeal 06-2026 333
2. The case of the prosecution as can be revealed
from the impugned Judgment and Order is as under. Para 2
of the impugned Judgment and Order is reproduced
below:-
"On 10/09/2016 informant Shivlal Jaglal Mhatre (PW-1)
lodged a report alleging therein that, on 09/09/2016 at
about 10.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. he was sitting in front of
Ganesh Idol pandol. Some children were playing Kabaddi
in front of Ganesh Mandal. At that time, one tractor
without having number plate and trolley bearing No.MH-
35/F-4829 came in a high speed. The children of village
stopped the said tractor and asked the driver not to drive
the vehicle in a high speed. There was a verbal quarrel
between them. The driver of the said tractor called his
friends. Thereafter, some persons came there on motorcycle
bearing No. MH-35/L-7823 and white Scorpio vehicle No.
MH-35/P-4803. They were 8-9 persons. It is alleged that
accused No.1 Gani Khan was also present with those
persons. They took out swords, iron rod and gun and came
in front of them and threatened to kill them. One of them
came in front of the informant and threatened to cut him.
When Sanjay Pache (PW-5) tried to save him, said person
assaulted him by sword and that PW-5 received injury on
his knee. It is alleged that accused Gani Khan showed pistol
and said to the informant that, "Hamare tractor ko kyo
rukate ho, tum sabko mar dalunga" and further he
allegedly ran towards them by showing pistol. However, at
that time, police van came to the spot. It is stated that
police arrested accused Gani Khan and four of his
collegues. It is further alleged that police seized one pistol
with six cartridges, two swords and one iron rod."
4 25) Apeal 06-2026 444
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
Applicant/Appellant that, the eye witnesses examined by
the prosecution did not support the case except witness no.
1. The witness no. 1 in his substantive evidence identified
only Accused no. 1 - Zulfikar Jabbar Gani and did not
identified the Appellant. He submits that, the conviction is
based solely on the confessional statements of the
co-accused, which were not put to the Appellant in his
statement under Section 313(i)(b) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.'), which caused prejudice to
him. He submits that, during the trial, the Appellant was on
bail, and further submits that, the sentence be suspended.
4. The learned APP for the State that, opposes the
Application and she submits that, though the substantive
evidence on record will not be sufficient to maintain the
conviction, the confessional statements are admissible as
per the provisions of Maharashtra Control of Organized
Crime Act, 1999 (for short, 'MCOCA') and the learned Trial
Court has rightly convicted the Appellant. She submits that,
the Application be rejected.
5. The evidence on record goes to show that, the
witness no. 1 did not identify the Appellant as one of the
assailants. The Appellant was on bail during the
Trial. The sentence awarded is the term
sentence. The Appeal is of the year 2025 and
there is no likelihood that, the same will be heard finally in
5 25) Apeal 06-2026 555
near future. In this view of the matter, I am inclined to
allow the application. Hence, the following order:-
ORDER
[I] Criminal Application is allowed.
[II] The substantive sentence imposed upon the Applicant namely Imran @ Shakki S/o. Mahfujali Khan, by the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Gondia, vide Judgment and Order dated 18/11/2025, passed in Special (MCOCA) Case No. 103/2020, is hereby suspended till the final disposal of the Appeal.
[III] The Applicant/Appellant be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- [Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only] with one surety in the like amount.
[IV] The Applicant shall co-operate in early disposal of the Appeal.
[V] Bail before the Trial Court.
[VI] Criminal Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.) B.T.K. Signed by: Mr. B.T. Khapekar Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 12/02/2026 16:15:20