Shamim Fardin Shaikh v. The State Of Maharashtra

915-ABA-831-2025 (CR) .doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 831 OF 2025 Shamim Fardin Shaikh ...Applicant

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra

...Respondent

____________________________________ Adv. Ritesh Thoblde a/w. Adv. Ankita Pramod Pai, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Avinash Naik, APP for the State.

Mr. L. B. Patil, PSI Sadar Bazar Police Station Solapur City present. ____________________________________

CORAM

: RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATED : 2 APRIL 2025 P.C.:

1.

The learned Advocate for the Applicant seeks liberty to amend the Anticipatory Bail Application and add the first Informant as a party Respondent No.2. Liberty is granted, as prayed for. 2.

Amendment to be carried out forthwith. It is made clear that if the amendment is not carried out, the anticipatory bail application will stand dismissed without further reference to this Court. 3.

The learned Advocate for the Applicants to serve copy of the Anticipatory Bail Application to newly added Respondent No2. Amol D. Nawale

915-ABA-831-2025 (CR) .doc 4.

Mr. Thobde, the learned advocate for the applicant, submits that the case of the first informant, as per the FIR, is that he is the owner of a plot of land along with Mr. Mantri. They purchased the piece of land and, in turn, sold various plots to different persons, except for Plot Nos. 56 and 57. The present applicant is concerned with Plot Nos. 56 and 57, which, according to him, were purchased by the applicant through the power of attorney holder of the first informant. 5.

He submits that the applicant came into possession of Plot Nos. 56 and 57 through an agreement by paying the consideration. He further submits that, in the meantime, the applicant needs to be protected.

6.

The learned APP submits that the agreement referred to by the applicant for his title to Plot Nos. 56 and 57 is not registered. Furthermore, the applicant has not been able to prove that he has paid the consideration for the said plots. Since there was no valid title in favor of the applicant, he could not have legally sold the said plots to any party. Therefore, the protection need not be granted to the applicant.

7.

Stand over to 9 April 2025 under the caption "For Urgent Circulation".

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.) Amol D. Nawale