Bombay High Court
Rajik Rajjak Shaikh And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 May, 2017
Bench: V.K. Tahilramani
10. cri apeal 373-17.doc
RMA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 373 OF 2017
1. Rajik Rajjak Shaikh
2. Haidarali Nijamuddin Shaikh
3. Thomas Sunder Arikswami
4. Rabbil Rajjak Shaikh
5. Abid Rehman Shaikh @ Majhar
6. Aniket Deepak Shingare .. Appellants
Versus
State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
...................
Appearances
Mr. Neelesh V. Kalantri a/w Advocate for the Appellants
Mr. Sushil S. Padhye
Mr. H.J. Dedhia APP for the State
...................
CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI &
M.S. KARNIK, JJ.
DATE : MAY 2, 2017.
ORAL ORDER [PER SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] :
1. Heard both sides.
2. The appellants - original accused Nos. 1 to 6 have
preferred this appeal against the order dated 14.2.2017
passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Pune in Criminal
Bail Application No. 4483 of 2016. The appellants were
jfoanz vkacsjdj 1 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/05/2017 00:11:27 :::
10. cri apeal 373-17.doc
seeking bail in C.R. No. 287 of 2016 of Khadki Police Station
for the offence under Sections 307, 324, 452, 323, 504, 143,
144, 147, 148, 149 and 427 of IPC, under Section 3(2)(10) of
the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of
Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Section 4(25) of Arms Act,
37(1) r/w 135 of the Bombay Police Act and under Section 7
of Criminal Amendment Act. By the said order, the bail
application of all the appellants came to be rejected.
3. The incident took place on 30.10.2016. The first
informant Rohan Sangela and his brother Nikhil were
standing near Khadki Bus Stand. At that time, one person
gave push to the first informant. The first informant asked
him the reason for pushing him whereupon that person gave
abuses to the first informant. Thereafter, the said person
called 7-8 persons. They all assaulted the first informant and
his brother. The absconding accused took out motorcycle
key of the first informant. Thereafter, all of them went to
Khadki Police Station to lodge the FIR. At that time,
jfoanz vkacsjdj 2 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/05/2017 00:11:28 :::
10. cri apeal 373-17.doc
appellant No. 4 gave abuses to the first informant in relation
to his caste. Thereafter, the appellants went to the house of
the first informant with weapons like sickles, sticks, baseball
bats, iron rod etc and assaulted Nikhil, the brother of the
first informant. They also caused damage to the household
articles as well as two vehicles outside the house. During
the said incident, they also assaulted Diya who was the
cousin sister of the first informant and one Vicky Bagare who
was the friend of the first informant. The appellants also
entered into the house of Anil Goyar, the uncle of the first
informant and assaulted Sagar who was the cousin brother of
the first informant. Thereafter, the appellants ran away.
4. It is an admitted fact that the investigation is over and
the charge sheet has been filed. Learned counsel for the
appellants submitted that though the C.R. is registered under
Section 307 of IPC, the medical certificates of the injured
persons do not make out a case under Section 307 of IPC.
He pointed out that four persons were injured in the incident
jfoanz vkacsjdj 3 of 5
::: Uploaded on - 05/05/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 07/05/2017 00:11:28 :::
10. cri apeal 373-17.doc
and all of them have sustained simple injuries. This fact is
admitted by the prosecution that all the four injured persons
have sustained only simple injuries. Thus, we find much
merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the
appellants that Section 307 of IPC is not attracted in the
present case.
5. At this stage, learned APP submitted that as far as
appellant Nos. 4 and 6 are concerned, they have
antecedents and they are involved in some other cases,
hence, if the appellants are released on bail, they may
threaten the witnesses. This concern can be addressed by
imposing certain conditions.
6. The appellants are in custody since 4.11.2016. Looking
to the facts of this case and the injuries sustained which are
of simple nature, we are inclined to grant bail to the
appellants. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order:-
ORDER
i. Each of the the appellants to be released on
jfoanz vkacsjdj 4 of 5
10. cri apeal 373-17.doc
bail in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- each [ Rs.
Thirty Thousand each ] with one or two
sureties to make up the said amount and P.R.
Bond in like amount.
ii. The appellants shall not enter within the
jurisdiction of Khadki Police Station. Learned
counsel for the appellants, on instructions,
submitted that during the period the
appellants are on bail, they will reside in the
house of Mr. Sameer Patel who is residing at
Savele, Post Salokh, Tehsil Karjat, Dist. Raigad
410 201.
iii. During the period the appellants are on bail,
they shall report to Karjat Police Station on
every alternate Sunday.
5. The appeal is allowed in the above terms.
[ M.S. KARNIK, J. ] [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J. ]
jfoanz vkacsjdj 5 of 5
