Azharuddin Shahnawaz Chikhlekar vs The State Of Maharashtra
2021 Latest Caselaw 15701 Bom

                                            1/4                          14.BA.3572.2021.doc

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                           CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.3572 OF 2021

Azharuddin Shahnawaz Chikhlekar                             ....       Applicant
  Versus
The State of Maharashtra                                    ...        Respondent
                                                  .........
Mr. Sameer A.K. Fouzi a/w. Mr. Vivek M. Punjabi for the Applicant.

Ms. P.P. Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State.

Mr. Raju Narawade, Padgha Police Station.
                                   .........
                                     CORAM : SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.

                                     DATE    : 3rd NOVEMBER, 2021.

P.C. :

1.        This is an application for bail u/s.439 of Cr.P.C in connection with

C.R.No.137 of 2021 registered with Padgha Police Station, Thane for the

offences punishable u/s.307, 324, 323 and 50 r/w.34 of IPC.

2.        One Saddam Majjid Chikhlekar fled FIR against the applicant on

2 .03.2021. It is alleged that on 25.03.2021 at 9.35 p.m. the informant was going

to Tulsi village by his motorcycle. One grey colour Innova car came from the

opposite side. The informant saw that one Azhar Chikhlekar i.e. the applicant

was driving the said Innova car. Yaseen Chikhlekar was is at his side and one

Aarti Palkar



          ::: Uploaded on - 04/11/2021                      ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2021 02:02:14 :::
                                          2/4                     14.BA.3572.2021.doc

Sayyam Ajij Patel is sitting on the vehicle. On seeing the applicant and co-

accused, the informant took his motorcycle towards village Tulsi. After seeing

that Innova car went towards Padgha, he turn his motorcycle near his land to

take location of his mobile. He parked his motorcycle near the iron gate and

started to take mobile location by sitting on the motorcycle. The Innova car

gave dash to the motorcycle of the Informant. The informant fell down on the

road and he sustained injury. Thereafter, the applicant and co-accused is run

away from the spot. The informant lodge FIR against the applicant. The

applicant came to be arrested on 01.09.2021. It is contended that in all 3

accused persons were arrested in the crime. Accused No.3 Patel was released

u/s.1 9 of Cr.P.C. as no material was found against him. It is contended that co-

accused Yaseen is ordered to be released on bail by the Sessions Court. In view

of the said fact, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is

entitled for bail on parity. He relied on the judgment of Sajid Basir Shaikh vs.

State of Maharashtra, reported in 2005(3)Mh.L.J.4 0 wherein the applicant was

released on bail on parity. It was held that the allegations against the accused

persons were similar in nature, hence, the applicant was released on bail on

parity. In the present case Yaseen was sitting near by the applicant. In fact, it is

the case of the applicant that the applicant was driving Innova car. Therefore,


Aarti Palkar



          ::: Uploaded on - 04/11/2021              ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2021 02:02:14 :::
                                          3/4                        14.BA.3572.2021.doc

the act of Yaseen and the applicant cannot be said to be similar. Therefore, the

grant of partiy is out of question.

3.        As far as the bail is concerned, it is alleged against the applicant that he

gave dashed to the informant. Learned APP submits that the informant has

sustained minor injuries. On the basis of the said submissions, learned counsel

for the applicant submits that offence u/s.307 is made out. For that purpose,

one has to read FIR. It is specifcally alleged by the informant that he saw

Innova car, hence, proceeded towards village Tulsi, but he was chased and

therefore Innova car gave him dash, so it cannot be said that the offence under

Section 307 is not made out.

4.        As far as the investigation is concerned, the investigation is almost

completed. Nothing is to be recovered at the instance of the applicant. Learned

APP submits that the applicant is facing in all 12 offences registered with Paghda

police station, Thane. Most of the offences are body offences. Learned counsel

for the applicant submits that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. At

the most, the strict condition can be imposed upon the applicant to avoid

threatening of witnesses and tampering the witnesses.                 Therefore, in my

opinion, the applicant is entitled for bail. Hence, I pass the following order.




Aarti Palkar



          ::: Uploaded on - 04/11/2021                 ::: Downloaded on - 05/11/2021 02:02:14 :::
                                           4/4                           14.BA.3572.2021.doc

                                            ORDER

1. The application is allowed.

2. The applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with

C.R.No.137/2021 registered with Padgha Police Station, Thane on furnishing

PR & SB bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like

amount.

5. The applicant is directed to attend the concerned police station every day

between 9.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m. till 10.12.2021.

5. The applicant is directed not to tamper with the prosecution witnesses.

. The application is disposed of in the above terms.

(SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J.)

Aarti Palkar