Bombay High Court
Shaikh Imran @ Kala Shaikh Rashid vs The State Of Maharashtra on 5 August, 2025
Author: Nitin B. Suryawanshi
Bench: Nitin B. Suryawanshi
2025:BHC-AUG:20713-DB
1 cra 532-25+
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 532 OF 2025
IN APEAL/102/2025
SHAIKH AMAR SHAIKH AKBAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Senior Counsel Mr. Rejendrraa Deshmukh i/b Mr. Deshmukh Devang
Rajendrraa, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. R. Wakale, APP for Respondent-State
...
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 526 OF 2025
IN APEAL/40/2025
SHAIKH SHAHABAJ SHAIKH KALIM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
...
Senior Counsel Mr. Rejendrraa Deshmukh i/b Mr. Deshmukh Devang
Rajendrraa, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. R. Wakale, APP for Respondent-State
....
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 112 OF 2025
IN APEAL/24/2025
SAYYED NASER SAYYED NOOR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Mr. Nilesh S. Ghanekar, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. R. Wakale, APP for Respondent-State
...
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 285 OF 2025
IN APEAL/54/2025
SHAIKH IMRAN @ KALA SHAIKH RASHID
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
2 cra 532-25+
...
Mr. Salunke Sudarshan Jeevanrao, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. R. Wakale, APP for Respondent-State
...
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 234 OF 2025
IN APEAL/42/2025
SHAIKH UBED SHAIKH BABU
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Mr. Jadhav Satej S., Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. R. Wakale, APP for Respondent-State
....
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 27 OF 2025
IN APEAL/9/2025
AAVEJ KAZI MUKHID KAZI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Mr. Jadhav Satej S., Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S. R. Wakale, APP for Respondent-State
Mr. Joslyn A. Menezes, Advocate for the intervenor-informant (in all the
above criminal application)
.....
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 29/07/2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 05/08/2025
P. C. :
1. All these applications are filed by the respective applicants,
who are convicted accused persons in MCOC Special Case No.51 of
2020 under the judgment and order dated 13/12/2024 passed by
the learned Special Judge (MCOCA), Beed.
3 cra 532-25+
2. The special Judge has convicted these applicants / accused
alongwith co-accused for the offences punishable under Sections
147, 148, 195-A r/w 149, 302 r/w 149, 120-B r/w 3(1) (i) of the
Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999, u/s 201 r/w
149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and u/s 3(2) of the Maharashtra
Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999. They are sentenced to
suffer life imprisonment and other imprisonments for the aforesaid
offences alongwith fine amounts. By way of these applications, the
applicants - accused are seeking suspension of their respective
substantive sentences of imprisonment and their release on bail
during the pendency of their respective appeals. The applicants
have also claimed suspension of the sentences of depositing
amount of fine.
3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the present
applicants - accused alongwith other co-accused, on 19/09/2019
at about 2.30 to 3.00 p.m., came on the spot of incident i.e. tea
stall of Usmabhai, adjacent to Sana Function Hall, situated on
Nagar Road, Beed in one white coloured Scorpio and on two
motorcycles. They were armed with deadly weapons like sword,
Kukri, sickle, dagger, iron rod, knife, revolver etc. One Sajed Ali
i.e. brother of the informant - Javed Ali, was present in the tea
stall. Earlier to this incident, accused No.1 Anwarkhan alongwith
4 cra 532-25+
some of these applicants - accused, had made demand of extortion
from Sajid Ali and others and on nonpayment of the same,
assaulted Sajed Ali with deadly weapons and attempted to kill him.
As such, a criminal prosecution was already going on against the
applicants and other co-accused in that respect. The applicants -
accused and other co-accused were pressurising Sajed Ali to settle
the case for which he was not ready. Therefore, at the time of
incident in the instant matter, all these applicants alongwith co-
accused assaulted Sajed Ali with deadly weapons and inflicted stab
injuries to him. As Sajed Ali fell down on the spot in the pool of
blood due to such assault, the applicants and other co-accused fled
from the spot. The learned Special Judge thereafter conducted the
trial and held these applicants - accused and other co-accused
guilty for the offences as mentioned above and convicted them as
per the judgment and order in the aforesaid case.
4. Learned senior counsel Mr. Rejendra Deshmukh while
arguing on behalf of applicant Shaikh Amar Shaikh Akbar i.e.
original accused No.12 in Criminal Application No.532 of 2025 and
also on behalf of applicant Shaikh Shahabaj Shaikh Kalim i.e.
original accused No.11 in Criminal Application No.526 of 2025,
submits that the prosecution has examined 44 witnesses and on
behalf of some of the accused, 5 defence witnesses were also
5 cra 532-25+
examined. According to him, all the accused had taken a defence
that they were involved falsely in the present crime only due to
political rivalry. He submits that though it was alleged that
applicant Shahabaj was holding Kukri, but no blood was detected
on the same. Likewise, no blood was also detected on the clothes of
Shahabaj. He pointed out that applicant Shaikh Amar was also
having a Kukri, but though human blood was found on the said
Kukari, it cannot be concluded that it was the blood of deceased,
which was of blood Group-AB. According to him, only on the
trouser of Shaikh Amar blood of Group-AB was found. He pointed
out that though PW-23 i.e. Momin Kousar Babamiya was cited by
the prosecution as an eye witness, who stated about enmity
between the deceased and the accused, but his conduct was
doubtful since there was no immediate disclosure of the incident by
him, either to the doctor or police. Learned senior counsel Mr.
Deshmukh further pointed out that applicant Shaikh Amar and
Shaikh Shahabaj are behind bars for about six years. According to
him, none of the witnesses has in fact told as to which accused had
which weapon. Thus, he concluded with the submission that false
implication of these applicants might be possible.
5. Learned counsel Mr. Nilesh Ghanekar while arguing on behalf
of applicant Sayeed Naser i.e. original accused No.6 in Criminal
6 cra 532-25+
Application No.112 of 2025, submits that applicant Sayeed Naser
Sayyed Noor is behind bar for 5 years and 10 months. According to
him, applicant Sayyed Naser Sayyed Noor was not at all present on
the spot of incident but he was in fact working at distant place in
Telangana State in the shop of one of the defence witnesses. He
pointed out that applicant had examined DW-1, 3 & 5 and also
relied on CCTV footage produced on record indicating that at the
time of incident, he was working in the shop at Telangana. He
further submitted that despite such trustworthy defence of alibi,
the learned trial court failed to consider the same in positive
manner. Therefore, he requested to allow the application of this
applicant - Sayyed Naser Sayyed Noor and prayed for suspension of
his sentence and to release him on bail.
6. Learned counsel Mr. S. J. Salunke on behalf of the applicant
Shaikh Imran @ Kala Shaikh Rashid i.e. original accused No.15 in
Criminal Application No.285 of 2025, submits that though as per
the evidence on record, one iron rod was shown to be seized from
this applicant, but no blood-stains were found on the said iron rod.
He pointed out that it was only alleged by the prosecution that this
applicant Shaikh Imran was trying to deter the public gathered on
the spot from interference and to save the deceased. He specifically
pointed out that this applicant was not having any criminal
7 cra 532-25+
antecedents to his credit. He, thus, prayed for release of this
applicant by suspending the substantive sentence of imprisonment
alongwith the order of depositing fine amount.
7. Similarly, while arguing on behalf of applicant Shaikh Ubed
Shaikh Babu i.e. original accused No.8 in Criminal Application
No.234 of 2025 and applicant Aavej Kazi Mukhid Kazi i.e. original
accused No.14 in Criminal Application No.27 of 2025, learned
counsel Mr. Satej Jadhav submitted that applicant Shikh Ubed was
not at all involved in the crime but his name was taken by the
informant only because he was relative of accused No.1 Anwar
Khan, who in the past, attempted to kill the deceased. So far as
role of applicant Aavej Kazi Mukhid Kazi is concerned, learned
counsel Mr. Jadhav submitted that applicant Aavej Kazi Mukhid
Kazi was allegedly holding a wooden log and did not make any
assault but only preventing public from intervening. He pointed
out that there was no recovery from applicant Aavej Kazi Mukhid
Kazi and he was involved only because the main accused i.e.
accused No.1 Anwar Khan got married with his sister. He
specifically pointed out that there were no criminal antecedents to
his credit so as to attract charge under MCOC Act. As such, he
prayed that both these applications be allowed.
8 cra 532-25+
8. On the contrary, learned APP strongly opposed the
submissions made on behalf of the applicants by their respective
learned counsel. He pointed out that there is evidence of 5 eye
witnesses on record and the informant i.e. PW-18 has deposed
specifically that there was involvement of all the applicants in the
assault. He pointed out that there were recoveries of weapons used
in the crime at the instance of these applicants. Prosecution has
established their presence on the spot with trustworthy and
reliable evidence. According to learned APP all these applicants
alongwith co-accused are involved in various crimes of serious
nature, committed in the past. He further submitted that all these
applicants alongwith co-accused have committed brutal murder of
deceased Sajed Ali in broad day light. Therefore, learned APP
submitted that considering the evidence against these applicants,
their respective applications be dismissed summarily.
9. On the other hand, learned counsel Mr. Joslyn A. Menezes for
the intervenor i.e. the informant Javed Ali in the instant case, has
also strongly opposed the applications and adopted the arguments
advance by the learned APP. According to him, there is ample
evidence on record about the involvement of all these applicants,
who mercilessly eliminated Sajed Ali - deceased by causing severe
9 cra 532-25+
stab wounds. As such, he also prayed for dismissal of all these
applications.
10. Heard respective submissions of the learned counsel
representing the applicants and learned APP and learned counsel
for the intervenor. With their assistance, we have also gone
through the voluminous record.
11. On going through the entire material on record, it reveals that
in the past also the applicants and other co-accused had assaulted
deceased Sajed Ali in the year 2013 on account of refusal to give
extortion money and therefore, crime under Section 307 of IPC
alongwith other sections, was registered against them. It has come
on record that Sajed Ali i.e. deceased was not ready to settle
criminal prosecution arising out of that incident with the
applicants and other accused. As such, motive to repeat the
assault on deceased is apparent in the instant case. Further, the
prosecution has examined 44 witnesses, out of which, 5 are eye
witnesses. It is not in dispute that death of Sajed Ali was due to
multiple stab wounds. Five eye witnesses examined by the
prosecution, have given evidence about the involvement of the
present applicants and other co-accused. It is significant to note
that it has come in the evidence that applicant Shahabaj was
10 cra 532-25+
holding Kukri at the time of assault and applicant Shaikh Amar
was also having same weapon on which human blood was detected.
Moreover, blood stains of Group-AB which was of deceased, were
also found on the trouser of applicant Shaikh Amar. Further, both
these applicants, namely Shaikh Shahabaj and Shaikh Amar, are
involved in various crimes of a serious nature along with other co-
accused as per the record. Therefore, considering the material
against them, we are not inclined to grant any relief to them at this
juncture.
12. So far as applicant Sayyed Naser Sayyed Noor is concerned,
three eye witnesses have named him being involved in the incident.
Moreover, a dagger was seized at his instance. Though he had
taken a defence of alibi that at the time of incident, he was working
far away in a shop at Telangana State and also relied on CCTV
footage to that effect, but learned Special Judge after considering
the said evidence, refused to rely on the same for the reasons
mentioned in the judgment. Further, as many as six crimes of
serious nature are registered against the applicant alongwith other
co-accused. Therefore, considering the prima facie material on
record about his involvement, we are not inclined to grant any relief
to him at this juncture.
11 cra 532-25+
13. Applicant Shaikh Imran @ Kala Shaikh Rashid i.e. accused
No.15, is seeking suspension of his sentence on the ground that he
has no criminal antecedents and though the prosecution has
alleged that he was having iron rod, but none of the witnesses
could state any specific role played by him in the assault.
Moreover, no blood stains were also found on the said iron rod
allegedly recovered at his instance. Further, there are no crimes of
serious nature registered against him in the past. Same is the case
in respect of applicant Aavej Kazi Mukhid Kazi i.e. original accused
No.14. There are also no criminal antecedents to his credit and
role attributed to him is only that he was holding a wooden log at
the time of the incident. The eye witnesses have also not stated
any specific role of this applicant in the assault. According to the
case of prosecution, he was seen preventing others from
intervening during the assault. However, it is important to note
that though it was alleged that he was holding a wooden log, but
there is no recovery of such wooden log at his instance.
14. So far as applicant Shaikh Ubed Shaikh Babu i.e. original
accused No.8 is concerned, prosecution claims that he was holding
a dagger at the time of incident and recovery of the said dagger is
also there at his instance. Moreover, blood was also found on the
said dagger. Further, the record reveals that three crimes of
12 cra 532-25+
serious nature alongwith other accused were also registered against
him prior to the present incident.
15. Therefore, considering all these aspects, we find that there is
evidence on record to show the active involvement of applicants
namely Shaikh Amar Shaikh Akbar, Shaikh Shahabaj Shaikh
Kalim, Sayyed Naser Sayyed Noor and Shaikh Ubed Shaikh Babu
in the assault. Further they were also having dangerous weapons
like Kukri, dagger etc. Serious crimes are registered against these
applicants alongwith other accused in the past. However, in
respect of applicant Shaikh Imran @ Kala Shaikh Rashid and
applicant Aavej Kazi Mukhid Kazi, there are no criminal
antecedents. Moreover, the respective roles ascribed to them also
indicate that they had not taken part in the actual assault.
Therefore, considering all these aspects, we intend to grant relief
only to applicant Shaikh Imran @ Kala Shaikh Rashid and
applicant Aavej Kazi Mukhid Kazi, at this juncture. However, we
deem it appropriate that these applicants/accused shall deposit
fine of Rs. 1,50,000/- each out of the total fine amount imposed
upon them by learned Trial Judge. In view of the same, we pass
the following order.
13 cra 532-25+
ORDER
(i) Criminal Application No. 285 of 2025 filed by Shaikh
Imran @ Kala Shaikh Rashid i.e. original accused No.15
is hereby allowed and his substantive sentence of
imprisonment as well as sentence of depositing fine
amount shall stand suspended during pendency of his
Criminal Appeal No.54 of 2025, subject to deposit of an
amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- out of total fine amount in the
Trial Court, within a period of one month. On
depositing such partial fine amount, he be released on
execution of his P.B. of Rs. 25,000/- with one or more
sureties in the like amount. Bail in Trial Court.
(ii) Criminal Application No.27 of 2025 is hereby allowed
only to the extent of applicant Aavej Kazi Mukhid Kazi
i.e. original accused No.14 and his substantive sentence
of imprisonment as well as sentence of depositing fine
amount shall stand suspended during pendency of his
Criminal Appeal No.9 of 2025, subject to deposit of an
amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- out of total fine amount, in
the Trial Court, within a period of one month. On
14 cra 532-25+
depositing such partial fine amount, he be released on
execution of his P.B. of Rs. 25,000/- with one or more
sureties in the like amount. Bail in Trial Court.
(iii) The applications of remaining applicants are dismissed.
(SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)
VS Maind/-
