The Court of Sessions for Greater Mumbai, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge A. A. Kulkarni, delivered a pivotal order on May 7, 2024, granting bail to the applicant, Mr. Shahanavaz alias Irfan Pyare Qureshi alias Nana, in Criminal Bail Application No. 1198 of 2024. The applicant was charged with a myriad of serious offenses, including Attempt to Murder (Section 307 IPC), along with unlawful assembly, rioting, and house trespass (Sections 452, 324, 323, 504, 141, 143, 145, 147, 148, 149 IPC, and provisions of the Maharashtra Police Act) in connection with C.R. No. 330/2024 of Shivaji Nagar Police Station. The Court’s decision was primarily based on the finding that the specific role assigned to the applicant in the FIR did not support the charge of attempted murder, and the injury sustained by the victim was not life-threatening, making this a crucial judgment for bail jurisprudence blogs focusing on the interpretation of Section 307.
The Serious Allegations and The Defense’s Argument
The case arose from an incident on April 16, 2024, where the informant and a friend were allegedly confronted by the applicant and his associates. The prosecution’s case, detailed in the FIR, stated that the applicant first abused the informant and caught his collar, dragging him on the road. The FIR then alleges that the applicant’s friends arrived and assaulted the informant with fist blows. Following this, the FIR describes that “Faisal Qureshi alias Sheru and Mohasin strangled the informant to death with a rope,” while another accused, Aamin, assaulted an accompanying friend (Ahamad Ali Khan) with a knife on his head.
Despite the involvement of the applicant in the initial scuffle, the defense, led by Ld. Adv. Ms. Jyoti Raju Sahu, successfully argued for bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. The core of their argument was the lack of a specific, serious role assigned to the applicant that would justify the severe charge of Section 307. They contended there were “no allegations against applicant of having assaulted informant with intention to commit offense under Section 307 of Cr.P.C” and that nothing was required to be seized at his instance, thus obviating the need for further custodial detention.
Judicial Analysis: Distinguishing Roles and Assessing Intent
The Additional Sessions Judge, Shri A.A. Kulkarni, undertook a detailed scrutiny of the FIR’s allegations to determine the applicant’s specific culpability, especially concerning the attempted murder charge. The Court’s crucial finding was a dissection of the actions attributed to each accused. The Court observed, “Taking into consideration these allegations in FIR, there are no allegations against applicant having assaulted to informant and caused any injury.” The specific acts of strangulation and knife assault were attributed to the co-accused (Faisal Qureshi alias Sheru, Mohasin, and Aamin), not the applicant. The applicant’s role was confined to the initial confrontation (abusing and dragging the informant).
Furthermore, the Court considered the victim’s medical status. It was confirmed that the Informant/injured was “out of danger and discharged from Hospital.” The Judge concluded that “Prima facie there is no record about sustained injury to informant which is likely to cause death.” This finding, combined with the minimal, non-lethal role assigned to the applicant, led the Court to conclude that “further detention of applicant is not required.” The alleged weapon had already been seized by the police during the investigation, removing the only potential ground for seeking continued custody.
Conditional Release and Monitoring
Based on the reduced culpability and the completion of the investigation concerning the applicant’s role, the Court allowed Criminal Bail Application No. 1198 of 2024. The applicant was ordered to be released on furnishing a Personal Recognizance (P.R.) Bond of Rs. 25,000/- along with one or two sureties in the like amount.
Recognizing the practicalities of arranging sureties, the Court granted the request of provisional cash surety for eight weeks. To maintain judicial control and prevent any interference with the trial, the Court imposed stringent conditions: the applicant must furnish his residential address proof and contact numbers to the Investigating Officer, and attend the Shivaji Nagar Police Station as and when required by the Investigating Officer on notice. He is explicitly barred from tampering with evidence or witnesses and leaving India without prior court permission, effectively balancing the right to liberty with the imperative of a fair legal process.