Sahil Isaq Shaikh v. The State Of Maharashtra

41 BA-1478-2022.doc BDP-SPS-TAC BHARAT DASHARATH PANDIT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION by BHARAT DASHARATH PANDIT Date: 2022.09.27 10:37:42 +0530 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1478 OF 2022 Sahil Isaq Shaikh .... Applicant.

V/s The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent.

WITH BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1851 OF 2022 Arun Kiran Mali .... Applicant.

V/s The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent.

Mr. Chetan S. Damre for the Applicant in BA/1478/2022. Ms. Angela Singha a/w Ms. Anima Mishra a/w Ms. Kajal Upadhyay i/b SBG Law for the Applicant in BA/1851/2022.

Ms. Sharmila S. Kaushik, learned APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM: NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE: SEPTEMBER 23, 2022 P.C.:- 1] Both the Applicants who are co-accused are seeking regular bail in C.R. No.I-293/2020 registered with Lasalgaon Police Station, Tal. Niphad, District Nashik for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 323, 504, 506, 143, 147 to 149, 188, 269 and 270 of the IPC and under Section 4(25) of the Arms Act.

2] The case of the prosecution is, both the Applicants armed with 1/2

41 BA-1478-2022.doc deadly weapons viz sword and knife committed the offence. 3] Both the Counsel for Applicants would urge that there are contradictions in the evidence/statements of eye witnesses with that of complainant, there is delay in lodging FIR and corresponding injuries suffered qua use of the weapons need to be taken into consideration.

4] Learned APP would oppose the prayer.

5] Fact remains that there is discovery under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act at the instance of both the Applicants which can be noticed from the investigation papers. In addition to above, six eye witnesses to the incident have named both the Applicants who have played active role in the commission of crime. Both the Applicants were armed with deadly weapons. That being so no case for bail is made out.

6] Both the Applications for bail stand rejected. ( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. ) 2/2