Introduction to the Judicial Proceeding

On April 22, 2024, the Court of Sessions for Greater Mumbai, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Shri A.S. Salgar, delivered an oral order granting regular bail to Abdul Sattar Shaikh in connection with a case registered at Deonar Police Station. The bail application, filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, was sought by the accused, Mr. Shaikh, who faced charges under Sections 323, 326, and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), stemming from C.R. No. 137/2024. The matter was argued by Mr. Harshad Meshram for the applicant/accused and Ld. APP Mrs. Geeta Sharma for the Respondent/State.

The Applicant’s Case for Release

The core argument presented by the defense was based on the applicant’s innocence and the status of the police investigation. Mr. Meshram submitted that his client had been falsely implicated in the crime, emphasizing that the complainant and the accused are legally husband and wife, suggesting the dispute arose from a domestic context. Crucially, the defense asserted that the injury sustained by the complainant was simple in nature, which is relevant to the severity of the charges, especially IPC Section 326 (Voluntarily causing grievous hurt). Furthermore, it was contended that the investigation was “practically completed,” negating the necessity for the applicant’s continued judicial custody. The applicant, a permanent resident of Mumbai, offered to abide by any and all conditions the Court might impose to ensure his compliance with the law and court proceedings.

Prosecution’s Objection and Stated Concerns

The prosecution, through the Investigating Officer’s reply, strongly resisted the bail application. The primary concern raised was the safety of the complainant. Since the complainant and the accused reside in the same house, the Investigating Officer expressed a fear of a “danger to the life of the complainant” if the accused were released. A secondary, but standard, objection was raised concerning the potential for the accused to tamper with prosecution witnesses or influence the ongoing legal process. Based on these concerns, the prosecution prayed for the outright rejection of the bail application to secure the safety of the victim and the integrity of the evidence.

The Court’s Detailed Analysis and Finding

Upon hearing arguments from both sides and scrutinizing the First Information Report (FIR) and the Investigation Officer’s material, the Court arrived at its decision. While the FIR specifically named the applicant and alleged he abused and assaulted the complainant with fist blows and a stone causing injury, the Court focused heavily on the status of the investigation. The Court noted that key investigative steps had already been concluded: the recording of witness statements, the drawing up of the spot panchanama, the seizure of the stone, and the collection of the complainant’s medical certificate. Critically, the Judge observed that nothing further was required to be recovered “at the instance of applicant/accused,” leading to the conclusion that “further detention of accused is not required.” Adding weight to this finding was the revelation that the complainant had already been discharged from the hospital and was out of danger. The Court further classified the alleged offence as triable by a Metropolitan Magistrate, a factor that lessened the gravity of the case in the context of bail. Ultimately, the judge determined that, considering the completion of the investigation and the nature of the offence, the applicant was entitled to be released on regular bail, provided stringent conditions were imposed.

Conditions of Release and Final Order

The Sessions Court thus allowed Bail Application No. 946 of 2024. Abdul Sattar Shaikh was ordered to be released on regular bail upon furnishing a Personal Recognizance Bond of Rs. 25,000/- along with one or more sureties in a like amount.

The bail was made subject to several specific directives designed to protect the prosecution’s case and the complainant:

• Mandatory Reporting: The applicant is directed to attend the concerned police station every Sunday between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 noon until the charge-sheet is officially filed.
• No Interference: The accused is strictly prohibited from making any inducement, threat, or promise to any witness, and is forbidden from tampering with the evidence or prosecution witnesses.
• Future Conduct: The applicant must not commit similar types of offences while on bail.
• Jurisdiction: The accused shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Trial Court.
• Interim Relief: Recognizing the practical difficulty of immediately arranging sureties, the Court temporarily allowed a provisional cash bail of Rs. 25,000/- for a period of four weeks from the date of release.

The order concluded with the stipulation that any breach of the imposed conditions would automatically result in the cancellation of the bail.