Amjat Sarwar Qureshi v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2025:BHC-AUG:29528

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

923 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1358 OF 2025 AMJAT SARWAR QURESHI

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sudarshan J. Salunke. APP for Respondents / State : Mr. P. P. Dawalkar. ...

CORAM :

SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE :

15th October, 2025.

P.C.:

Heard.

This is an application, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Cr.P.C."), for grant of regular bail in connection with Crime No.287 of 2024, registered with Jintur Police Station, District Parbhani, for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, "the IPC") and under Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. The learned counsel for the applicant pointed out the report, in which it is averred that the applicant alongwith co-accused committed murder of the son of informant namely Sagannoor. At that time, the applicant caught hold the hands of Sagannoor and coaccused Aleem assaulted on his back.

The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the trial is proceeding with very slow speed. Trial will take a long period. The earlier bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 10th January, 2025 passed in Bail Application no.2147 of 2024 with liberty to file fresh bail application after six months. It is lastly prayed to allow the application. The learned APP for the State strongly opposed the application and submitted that the applicant is involved in the serious crime of murder. The evidence of two witnesses is over. Trial will be concluded expeditiously. It is lastly prayed to reject the application. Perused the charge-sheet, particularly, the report and the statements of witnesses.

The role of the applicant is specific that he caught hold the victim Sagannoor and thereafter, another co-accused assaulted him on his back and they ran away. Sagannoor died. The role of the applicant is prima-facie establishing from the material on record. If the applicant is released on bail, he will pressurize the prosecution witnesses and tamper with the evidence.

Considering all these reasons, the application deserves to be rejected. The application is rejected.

The learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, in any case within six months, as directed by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Tapas Kumar Palit Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 322 and report to this Court accordingly. However, it is clarified that if any matter is earlier expedited either by the Honourable Supreme Court or this Court, then the Trial Court shall conclude that case first and then proceed further with this trial. Needless to mention that it is a sessions trial and word "sessions" means once it is started it shall not be stopped till it is concluded.

[ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] nga