Naushadali Mohd Ismail Khan And ANR v. The State Of Maharashtra

13.ABA.1650.16 wt.1649.16.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1650 OF 2016 Nizamuddin Janmohd Ansari & Ors.

.. Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1649 OF 2016 Naushadali Mohd. Ismail Khan & Anr.

.. Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Mr. Imran Shaikh Advocate for the Applicant.

Ms. N.S. Jain, A.P.P. for the Respondent - State. CORAM : N.W. SAMBRE, J.

DATED : 17th NOVEMBER, 2016.

P.C. :

In both the applications applicants are accused in Crime No. 266 of 2016 registered on 5th July, 2016 for the offence punishable under Sections 324, 326, 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The alleged incident took place on 5th July, 2016. Wherein complainant Shahanawaj Khan has alleged that the Shaukat Khan, his younger brother runs a Automobile Shop, which was managed by their sons. It is then claimed that the present applicants are owners of Soron Car Accessories, whose sons have entered in an altercations with the applicants. It is claimed that the accused persons assaulted the complainant and his accomplice, resulting into registration of crime in question. It is also claimed that the complainant's son Arbaz suffered burn injuries because of fall of hot oil in the quarrel between the parties. Waghmare 1/2

13.ABA.1650.16 wt.1649.16.doc It is worth to note here that, a counter crime being Crime No.267 of 2016 is registered at the behest of Niyajulhak Ansari against the complainant Shahanawaj Khan in Crime No.266 of 2016. From the record it appears there there are counter F.I.R. This Court vide order dated 23rd September, 2016 has granted ad-interim protection in favour of present accused persons. Pursuant to the same, all the applicants-accused are informed to have appear before the Investigating Officer and give their statement and co-operated in the investigation. Statement is made through A.P.P. by the Investigating Officer that the custodial interrogation of the applicants is not required. In the above referred background i.e. counter F.I.R. and the statement made by the A.P.P., in my opinion the applications needs to be allowed.

In the event of arrest, the applicants be released on furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- each with one surety in the like amount. They shall attend the Investigating Officer as and when called. Applications are allowed in the above terms.

(N.W. SAMBRE, J.) Waghmare 2/2