1
MHCC020063562024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER MUMBAI AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 996 OF 2024
Salludin @ Sallu DJ Mohd. Said Khan
… Applicant/accused
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
(Through of Deonar Police Station vide
C.R. No. 162/2024)
… Respondent/State
Appearance :Mr. B.G. Mule, Ld. Advocate for Applicants/Accused.
Mr. O.S. Maraskolhe, 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.162/2024 registered
with Deonar police station for the offence punishable under
Sections 307, 385, 324, 323, 504, 506 (2) of the I.P.C. and Sections
37 (1) (a), 135 of Maharashtra Police Act.

2
2.

Applicant/accused
submitted
that
he
has
not
committed any offence. He has no concerned with the offence. He
is not directly or indirectly involved in the present offence.
Investigation
of
crime
is
completed.

permanent resident of Mumbai.

Applicant/accused
is
He will not abscond. Hence,
applicant/accused prayed for grant of regular bail in connection
with C.R. No.162/2024 registered with Deonar. police station.
3.

The investigation officer submitted reply at Exh.2 and
resisted the application on the ground that investigation is in
progress. He submitted that applicant/accused has committed the
crime alongwith other accused persons. Applicant/accused is
principal accused in crime. Applicant/accused is having criminal
antecedents. If bail is granted to applicant/accused then he will
tamper prosecution evidence. Lastly, investigating officer prayed for
rejection of bail application.
4.

Heard
applicant/accused
Ld.
and
Advocate
Ld.

Mr.

APP
B.G.
O.S.

Mule
for
the
Maraskolhe
for
Respondent/State. I have also heard API Rahul Mokate attached to
Deonar Police Station.
5.

Perused contents of application and say filed by
investigating officer. By this application applicant/accused prayed
for grant of regular bail. Investigation officer objected the
application. I have gone through the F.I.R. The name of
applicant/accused is mentioned in F.I.R. as accused No.1. In F.I.R.
there are allegation against against applicant/accused that he
demanded an amount of Rs.1,000/- to witness Sachin. There are
3
allegation against applicant/accused that he assaulted to witness
Sachin by fist blow and kick blow. The role attributed to
applicant/accused is that he demanded amount of Rs.1,000/- to
witness Sachin and assaulted to witness Sachin by fist and kick
blows. In F.I.R. all the allegations are levelled against accused Sahil
that he assaulted to Sachin by bamboo stick. In F.I.R. all the
allegations are levelled against accused Jagavar that he assaulted to
the complainant by means of knife on his back. So also there are
allegation against accused Jagavar that he inflicted blow to witness
Sachin by knife on neck. Thus all the allegation of attempted to
commit murder are against against accused Jagavar and Sahil. In
F.I.R. there are no allegation against applicant/accused that he
assaulted to the complainant or witness by any weapon. There are
no allegation against applicant/accused that he attempted to kill
complainant and witness Sachin. In my view the role of
applicant/accused is very limited one and he is entitled to be
released on regular bail.
6.

It is seen from the report of investigating officer that
investigating officer recorded the statement of witnesses and also
seized weapon i.e. wooden bamboo stick from the accused.
Investigating officer also seized knife from accused Rahul. Nothing
has been recovered at the instance of applicant/accused. So far as
applicant/accused is concerned, the investigation of crime is
practically completed. Hence he is entitled for grant of regular bail.
7.

Applicant/accused is in jail from 08.04.2024. 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
4
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.
8.

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. Hence, application needs to be allowed.
Therefore, I proceed to pass following order :ORDER
1.

Criminal
Bail
Application
No.996
of
2024
filed
by
Applicant/accused is allowed.
2.

Applicant/accused namely Salludin @ Sallu DJ Mohd. Said
Khan, resident of New Gautam Nagar, Plot No.04, Near
Durgamata Mandir, Bhimwadi Road, Adarsh Chawl, Govandi,
Mumbai-400 043 be released on regular bail on furnishing P. R.
Bond of Rs.25,000/- along with one or more sureties in like
amount in connection with C.R. No. 162/2024 registered with
Deonar Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections
307, 385, 324, 323, 504, 506 (2) of the I.P.C. and section
37 (1) (a), 135 of M.P. Act on following conditions :-
5
(a) The applicant/accused is directed to attend Deonar Police
Station on every Sunday of each month in between 10.00 a.m.
to 12.00 noon till filing of charge-sheet.
(b) The applicant/accused shall not enter into vicinity where
the informant resides.
(c) The applicant/accused and his sureties shall provide their
respective residential addresses, mobile numbers and email
addresses, if any to investigation officer. The applicant/accused
shall intimate any such change in address or telephone number
and Email ID forthwith.
(d) The 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.
(e) The applicant/accused shall not leave India without prior
permission of Ld. Court.
(f) Breach of any conditions by the applicant/accused, shall
result in cancellation of bail.
3.

Provisional cash bail of Rs.25,000/- is allowed to the
applicant/accused for period of 4 weeks to furnish surety from
the date of release.

4.

Bail before Ld. Trial Court.

5.

Criminal Bail Application No.996 of 2024 stands disposed off
accordingly.

Date : 08.05.2024
Digitally signed
by ATUL
SHANKARRAO
ATUL
SHANKARRAO SALGAR
SALGAR
Date:
2024.05.14
11:53:07 +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