Bombay High Court
Shoeb Mansuri @ Samir Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 13 February, 2023
Bench: Nitin W. Sambre, R. N. Laddha
Digitally
signed by
CHITRA
CHITRA SANJAY
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2023.02.15
11:34:31
+0530
Chitra Sonawane 4-IA-2418-2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2418 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.735 OF 2022
Shoeb Mansuri @ Samir Shaikh
Age 28 years, Occ.Service
R/o Behind Annapurna hotel,
Shahad gate, Ulhasnagar,
Dist.Thane
Org.R/o Shadipur, Po.Harganur,
Tal.Nagina, Dist.Bijnour, .... Applicant/Appellant
Vs.
1. The State of Maharashtra
(Through Kamothe Police
Station, Prosecution
C.R.No.141/.2017)
2. Kamal Ajit Haldar (wife deceased)
R/o Vilas Bhagar Chawl,
Motha Khanda, Kamothe,
Navi Mumbai. .... Respondents
CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE
& R.N. LADDHA, JJ.
DATE : 13 FEBRUARY 2023.
Mr Aniket Nikam i/by Mr Amit Icham for Applicant/Appellant.
Mr A. R. Kapadnis, APP for Respondent-State.
Page No. 1 of 5
____________________________________________
13 February, 2023.
Chitra Sonawane 4-IA-2418-2022.doc
Order (Per R.N. Laddha) :
This is an application for suspension of sentence and grant
of bail during the pendency of the Appeal.
2. The trial Court, by the judgment and order dated 7.7.2022,
in Sessions Case No.342 of 2019 (old Case No.12 of 2018),
convicted the Applicant, for the offences punishable under
Sections 302, 326, 324, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code
and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment.
3. It is the case of the prosecution that on 3.10.2017, the
Applicant assaulted the deceased Kamal Ajit Halder with a knife
and committed his murder.
4. In Niranjan Singh & Anr. Vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote &
Ors.1, the Hon'ble Supreme Court enunciated that a detailed
examination of evidence and elaborate documentation of the
merits should be avoided while passing orders on bail applications.
Keeping in view, the above principle we have heard learned
Counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent-
State.
5. Mr Aniket Nikam, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf
of the Applicant, submitted that though the prosecution's case is
1 (1980)2 SCC 559.
Page No. 2 of 5
____________________________________________
13 February, 2023.
Chitra Sonawane 4-IA-2418-2022.doc
based on the statements of the eyewitnesses, none of the alleged
eyewitnesses in their evidence before the Court supported the
prosecution. He submitted that no reliance could be placed on the
statement, which was considered to be the dying declaration of the
deceased, as the alleged declaration was recorded without
obtaining an endorsement of the concerned Medical Officer that
the deceased was conscious and oriented to time, place and person
before, during and at the end of the dying declaration.
6. Mr A.R. Kapadnis, learned APP for the State, submitted that
there is evidence in the form of a dying declaration to connect the
present Applicant with the crime. It is submitted that the
certificate of the doctor before recording the dying declaration by
the Police Officer is not mandatory as long as the Police Officer
finds that the deceased is in conscious and fit state of mind. In his
view, even if the conviction is based on the sole testimony and the
dying declaration, the same is corroborated by other material on
record.
7. It is not disputed that none of the eyewitnesses to the
incident supported the prosecution's case. It is also not in dispute
that there is no endorsement over the dying declaration of the
deceased that he was conscious and oriented to time, place and
person before, during and at the end of the dying declaration. It is
also not in dispute that though the dying declaration was narrated
Page No. 3 of 5
____________________________________________
13 February, 2023.
Chitra Sonawane 4-IA-2418-2022.doc
to PW 4 in Hindi, the same was recorded in Marathi. The
prosecution did not examine the Medical Officer before whom the
alleged dying declaration was recorded. The Investigating Officer,
in his cross-examination, has admitted that at the relevant time, he
did not specifically obtain the opinion of the Medical Officer as to
whether the deceased was physically and mentally fit to give a
statement.
8. Considering these facts, the case for suspension of sentence
and grant of bail is made out. The Application, is, accordingly,
allowed in the following terms.
ORDER
i) During the pendency of the present Appeal, a
substantive sentence imposed upon Applicant is
suspended, and he be released on bail on the execution
of a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/-, with one or two solvent
sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the
learned trial Court.
ii) The Applicant shall remain present before this
Court as and when directed.
iii) Interim Application stands disposed of.
[R. N.LADDHA, J.] [NITIN W. SAMBRE,J.]
____________________________________________
13 February, 2023.
Chitra Sonawane 4-IA-2418-2022.doc
____________________________________________
13 February, 2023.
