Mohd. Sajid S/O Shaikh Imam v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Pso, Chandur Bazar Tq. Chandur Bazar Dist. Amravati

2026:BHC-NAG:1095 1 41 aba837.25+1.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPLICATION [ABA] NO. 837 OF 2025 MOHD. SAJID S/o SHAIKH IMAM

VERSUS

STATE OF MAH., THRU. P.S.O., P.S., CHANDUR BAZAR, DIST. AMRAVATI WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION [ABA] NO. 838 OF 2025 MOHD. JAVED S/o SHAIKH IMAM

VERSUS

STATE OF MAH., THRU. P.S.O., P.S., CHANDUR BAZAR, DIST. AMRAVATI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's Order appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. J. B. Kasat, Advocate for the applicants. Mrs. H. N. Prabhu, A.P.P. for the non-applicant/State Ms. Sapna S. Jadhav, Advocate for assist to prosecution. CORAM : M. W. CHANDWANI, J.

Reserved on : JANUARY 09, 2026.

Pronounced on : JANUARY 22, 2026.

1.

Both these applications arise out of the same crime. Therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2.

Heard Mr. J. B. Kasat, learned counsel appearing for the applicants, Mrs. H. N. Prabhu, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State and Ms. Sapna S. Jadhav, learned counsel for assisting the prosecution.

3.

The applicants in both the applications are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No. 576/2025 registered with Police Station, Chandur Bazar, Dist. Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(2), 318(4), 319(1), 351(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2 41 aba837.25+1.odt 4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants submitted that the applicants in both the applications have not played any role in commission of the offence. Only because of political rivalry, they have been roped in this crime. According to the learned counsel, no amount has been paid by the complainants to any of the applicants. In the complaint, the allegation of paying the amount is attributed to some other persons and not to the applicants. It is contended that the complaint is vague and arising out of a civil dispute between the complainants and other co-accused. The learned counsel submitted that the applicants as per the dictum of this Court, have attended the concerned police station and cooperated in the investigation. Nothing is required to be seized/ recovered from the applicants. Therefore, learned counsel prayed for grant of anticipatory bail. 5.

Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State objected the applications on the ground that complainant Jakia Parveen and others have been duped by the applicants and other co-accused on the pretext of investing the amount in the oil business for earning handsome profit. Some amount was returned to the complainants as a profit but now total amount of Rs.49,20,200/- is outstanding against the applicants and other co-accused and they are avoiding to repay the amount.

6.

Perusal of the case diary reveals that in the year

3 41 aba837.25+1.odt 2023, co-accused Nusrat Bano asked the complainant Jakia Parveen to invest the amount in the oil business of her brother-in-law, namely, Mohd. Sajid Sk. Imam, who is other co-accused. The complainant was promised that she will get a profit of Rs.400/- to 500/- per oil tin. Accordingly, complainant Jakia Parveen gave the amount to co-accused Nusrat Bano from time to time to the tune of Rs. 19,80,000/-. The relatives of Jakia Parveen, who are the other complainants, also invested in the said business. Thus, total amount of Rs.94,38,200/- came to be invested by them. Though, intermittently the accused persons repaid some profit but since the beginning of the year 2025, the applicants and other co-accused started avoiding to pay the profit as well as the principal amount. 7.

It appears that the main allegation of inducement is against co-accused Nusrat Bano. The case diary does not reveal that any amount was given by the complainants to the present applicants directly. There is no material on record that any amount was paid by any of the complainant to the applicants. Nothing is required to be seized from the applicants. There is no complaint that the applicants who appeared before the Investigating Officer under the dictum of this Court, did not cooperate in the investigation.

8.

In view of the above and considering the allegations against the present applicants, the role attributed to them and the nature of offence, a case is made out for confirmation of the interim protection granted by this

4 41 aba837.25+1.odt Court by order dated 11.11.2025.

9.

Accordingly, ABA Nos. 837/2025 and 838/2025 are allowed.

10.

The interim protection granted to the applicants by this Court (Coram : Smt. Vrushali V. Joshi, J.) vide order dated 11.11.2025 is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions, except condition (iv) of the operative order.

11.

The applicants shall attend the concerned police station as and when directed by the Investigating Officer. 12.

Both the applications stand disposed of.

( M.W.Chandwani, J. ) Diwale Signed by: DIWALE Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 22/01/2026 20:43:52