1
MHCC020061522024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER MUMBAI AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 961 OF 2024
Sohel Mustak Khan
… Applicant/accused
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
(Through of Trombay. Police Station vide … Respondent/State
C.R. No. 22/2024)
Appearance :Ms. Rui Danawala, Ld. Advocate for Applicants/Accused.
Mr. Sachin Patil, Ld. APP for the Respondent/State.

CORAM : H. H. THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
SHRI A.S. SALGAR (C.R. NO.24)
DATED : 8TH MAY, 2024
(ORAL ORDER)
(Dictated and pronounced in the open Court)
This is an application filed by applicant/accused under
Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for releasing
him on regular bail in connection with C.R. No.22/2024 registered
with Trombay. police station for the offence punishable under
Sections 307, 397, 452, 504, 506(2), 427 r/w 34 of I.P.C. and
Sections 37(1)(A) r/w 135 of Maharashtra Police Act.

2
2.

Applicant/accused submitted that he has been falsely
implicated in this crime. He is in jail from 17.01.2024. The
investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed before
Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate. Applicant/accused is ready and willing
to furnish surety. Hence, applicant/accused prayed for grant of
regular bail in connection with C.R. No.22/2024 registered with
Trombay. police station.
3.

The investigation officer submitted reply at Exh.2 and
resisted the application on the ground that applicant/accused
assaulted to the complainant and his mother. There are criminal
antecedents
against
applicant/accused.

Applicant/accused
is
habitual offender. If bail is granted to applicant/accused then he
will tamper prosecution evidence. Lastly, investigating officer
prayed for rejection of bail application.
4.

Heard Ld. Advocate Ms. Rui Danawala for the
applicant/accused and Ld. APP Sachin Patil for Respondent/State.
5.

On the basis of the report lodged by the informant
namely Bramhanand Das, Trombay police station registered the
offence punishable under Sections 307, 397, 452, 504, 506(2), 427
r/w 34 of I.P.C. and Sections 37(1)(A) r/w 135 of Maharashtra
Police Act vide C. R. No. 22/2024 against accused persons. It is
alleged that on 17.01.2024 at about 10.30 a.m. the informant
closed his Pan Stall and was going to his house. At that time
accused Sohel Khan demanded free cigarette packet to the
informant.

The
informant
refused
to
give
him.

The
applicant/accused Sohel got angry and he took out knife and
3
inflicted blow on the chest of informant. The informant raised his
hand for his protection in order to save blow and said knife was hit
on the little finger of his right hand and thereby sustained injury.
Brother of Sohel Khan namely Firoz Khan was also came there and
bite the shoulder of brother of informant and caused injury. The
accused persons also entered the house of informant and thrown
the articles and forcefully taken the cash of Rs.5,000/- from
informant’s house.
6.

Perused contents of application and say filed by
investigating officer. By this application applicant/accused prayed
for grant of regular bail. This is second bail application preferred by
applicant/accused. First bail application No.251/2024 filed by
applicant/accused was rejected by the Court. After filing of chargesheet the applicant/accused has preferred this bail application. In
my view as charge-sheet has been filed against applicant/accused,
there is change in circumstance. Therefore, 2 nd bail application is
maintainable.
7.

It is to be noted that the name of applicant/accused is
mentioned in FIR. I have gone through the contents of FIR. In FIR
there are allegation against applicant/accused that he inflicted blow
by the knife on the chest of complainant but the blow was hit to the
right hand finger. Medical Certificate on record shows that injury
sustained by the complainant is simple in nature and vital part of
organ was not damaged in the incident. The Medical Certificate is
showing that the injury has been caused by blunt object. Injury
Certificate is not showing that injury caused due to sharp knife.

4
8
In this case investigation is completed and charge-sheet
has been filed. In my view, as charge-sheet is filed, there is no
hurdle to grant bail to the applicant/accused.
9.

It is argued by Ld. A.P.P. that applicant/accused is
having criminal antecedent and therefore, bail cannot be granted to
him. However, this submission of Ld. A.P.P. cannot be accepted.
Merely
because
other
criminal
cases
are
pending
against
applicant/accused, the bail cannot be refused to him. Moreover,
mere pendency of criminal cases against the applicant/accused is
not a sufficient ground for denying bail to applicant/accused. The
other criminal cases would not come in the way of grant of bail. In
my view the applicant/accused can be released on bail by imposing
stringent conditions.
10.

In present case the applicant/accused is in custody
since 17.01.2024. No purpose will be served by keeping him behind
the bar. It will take time to commence the hearing of the case.
Therefore, it is not proper to detain the applicant/accused for
indefinite period. Moreover, the applicant/accused is permanent
resident of Maharashtra Nagar, Mumbai. He will not abscond. He is
ready and willing to co-operate the investigating machinery.
Therefore, applicant/accused is entitled for regular bail on
conditions. Hence, application needs to be allowed. Therefore, I
proceed to pass following order :ORDER
1.

Criminal
Bail
Application
No.961
of
2024
filed
by
Applicant/accused persons is allowed.
2.

Applicant/accused namely Sohel Mustak Khan, resident of Indira
Nagar Galli, Room No.1, 07/06, Maharashtra Nagar, Mankhurd
5
East, Mumbai-400 088 be released on regular bail on furnishing
P.R. Bond of Rs.30,000/- along with one or more sureties in like
amount in connection with C.R. No. 22/2024 registered with
Trombay police station for the offence punishable under Sections
307, 397, 452, 504, 325, 506 (2), 427 r/w 34 of I.P.C. and
Sections 37(1)(A) r/w 135 of Maharashtra Police Act on following
conditions :(a) Applicant/accused is directed to attend Court on all dates of
the case.
(b)Applicant/accused
and
his
sureties
shall
provide
their
respective residential addresses, mobile numbers and email
addresses, if any to investigation officer. Applicant/accused No.1
shall intimate any such change in address or telephone numbers
and Email ID forthwith.
(c) Applicant/accused should not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts
of case so as to dissuade them from disclosing the facts to Court or
any Police Officer and should not tamper with the evidence and
prosecution witnesses.
(d) Applicant/accused shall not leave India without prior
permission of Ld. Sessions Court.
(e) Breach of any conditions by applicant/accused No.1 shall
result in cancellation of bail.
3.

Bail before this Court.

4.

Criminal Bail Application No.961 of 2024 stands disposed off
accordingly.

Date : 08.05.2024
ATUL
SHANKARRAO
SALGAR
Digitally signed by
ATUL
SHANKARRAO
SALGAR
Date: 2024.05.14
11:52:00 +0530
[A.S. SALGAR]
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
GREATER MUMBAI
(C.R. No.24)
6
Dictated on
Transcribed on
HHJ signed on
: 08/05/2024
: 09/05/2024
: 10/05/2024
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
Upload Date Upload Time
13/05/2024 3.30 p.m.

Name of Stenographer
PRAJWALA V. PHODKAR
Name of the Judge (With Court HHJ SHRI. A.S. SALGAR (CR 24)
Room No.)
Date of Pronouncement
JUDGMENT /ORDER
of 08/05/2024
JUDGMENT /ORDER signed by 10/05/2024
P.O. on
JUDGMENT /ORDER uploaded 13/05/2024
on
7