Shaikh Mujeeb Shaikh Nasir Qureshi v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2024:BHC-AUG:13923 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 982 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1071 OF 2024 Shaikh Mujeeb Shaikh Nasir Qureshi

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra and another ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Rohit P. Patwardhan APP for Respondents: Ms. Rashmi P. Gour .....

CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATED : 10th JULY, 2024.

PER COURT :- 1.

The applicant apprehends arrest in connection with crime No. 80 of 2024 registered with Begumpura Police Station, district Aurangabad, for the offences punishable under sections 323, 341, 392, 504, 506 r.w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2.

It is the prosecution's case that the informant Mehraj Patel lodged a complaint alleging that he is running three petrol pumps with his father and brother. On 23.3.2024, at 10.30 p.m. the informant was called by Yunus Patel in Himayat Bag. When he went there, he met the applicant and co-accused Annu Qureshi and Taibu Qureshi. It is alleged that co-accused Annu Qureshi abused the informant and threatened him not to demand any money from Yunus Patel and not to go towards plot. It is alleged that the applicant and co-accused

-2caught hold the informant and co-accused Annu Qureshi took out Rs.15,000/- from the pant's pocket of the informant. It is alleged that thereafter co-accused assaulted the informant and applicant threatened the informant.

3.

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to old dispute. The allegations against the applicant are that he threatened the informant. Considering the allegations against the applicant, his custodial interrogation is not required. Hence he requested to allow the application.

4.

It is the contention of the learned APP that the applicant was part of the group, who threatened the informant and robbed the amount of Rs.15,000/- from the pocket of the informant. The custodial interrogation is required. Hence he requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused the F.I.R. and the police papers produced on record. The allegations against the applicant are that he threatened the informant and co-accused Annu Qureshi had taken out the amount from the pocket of the informant. Considering the allegations against the applicant, his custodial

-3interrogation is not required. Hence I pass the following order :-

O R D E R

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) The interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 02.07.2024 stands confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) rlj/