Intro Summary
The Court of Sessions for Greater Bombay has granted bail to two young applicants, Arshad Ali Jainul Abdin Shaikh (23) and Mohd. Ahmed Yunus Ambreliya (19), in connection with a robbery and accident case (C.R. No. 197 of 2024) registered at Dongari Police Station. The incident involved the robbery of ₹2,000 from a petrol pump employee and dragging him with their vehicle. The order, delivered by Dr. S. D. Tawshikar on April 22, 2024, acknowledged that the stolen amount and the vehicle were recovered. Crucially, the Court decided that the registration of prior serious cases against the younger applicant, Mohd. Ambreliya, would not be the sole ground to refuse bail, especially considering the applicants’ tender age and the overall circumstances of the case, thereby allowing conditional release.
Prosecution’s Arguments
Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Ajit Chavan strongly opposed the bail application, asserting that the accused acted with deliberation and pre-planning in executing the offence. The prosecution’s key objections focused on the younger applicant, Mohd. Ahmed Yunus Ambreliya, noting that despite his age of 19 years, he has two criminal antecedents registered with Dongari Police Station, including serious charges under Sections 307 (Attempt to Murder) and 392 (Robbery) of the IPC. Mr. Chavan argued that if released on bail, the applicants might again indulge in similar offences. The prosecution also informed the Court that although CCTV footage was checked at the petrol pump, the camera was not functional at the relevant time, but they have two eye-witnesses to the incident.
Defense’s Arguments
Ld. Adv. Mr. Shahid Iqbal, appearing for the applicants, submitted that the accused have been behind bars since the date of the incident. He characterized the incident as a “simple case of attraction” (dispute) between the informant and the accused at the time of filling petrol, suggesting they were falsely implicated. The defense highlighted that there was no weapon used and that the informant did not sustain grievous injuries. Furthermore, they emphasized key developments in the investigation: the vehicle involved is already seized, and the entire amount of the offence, ₹2,000/-, is also recovered. Considering the age of the accused and the overall circumstances, the defense argued for bail, assuring the Court that the applicants would cooperate with the investigation and abide by any imposed conditions.
Court’s Analysis and Rationale (Dr. S. D. Tawshikar)
The Court noted the applicants’ ages, with Arshad Ali Shaikh being 23 and Mohd. Ahmed Yunus Ambreliya being 19, and confirmed the recovery of both the stolen amount (₹2,000/-) and the vehicle. The Judge acknowledged that while Applicant No. 1 (Arshad Ali Shaikh) has no criminal antecedents, Applicant No. 2 (Mohd. Ahmed Yunus Ambreliya) has two prior serious registrations. However, the Court delivered a decisive ruling on the relevance of these past cases, stating that the “mere registration of two criminal cases against him would not be a sole ground to refuse bail to him,” especially since there was no conviction record against the young man.
Considering the overall circumstances of the case, particularly the recovery of the stolen property and the accused’s tender age, the Court concluded that the applicants could be released on bail with certain conditions. The Court expressly warned that if the applicants “indulges in similar offences, the bail granted by this Court would be cancelled.” The bail was granted on the execution of a Personal Recognizance (P.R.) and Surety Bond (S.B.) of ₹20,000/- each with one surety in the like amount. Conditions included attending the Dongari Police Station as and when called until the charge-sheet is filed, not tampering with evidence, furnishing proof of residence, and refraining from committing any criminal act while on bail.