← Library
Bombay High CourtIA/2222/2025disposed off

Mohammed Salim Alam Shaikh v. State Of Maharashtra

2025-06-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sarang Vijaykumar Kotwal , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Shyam C. Chandak3 pages

WAKLE MANOJ JANARDHAN Manoj 7-IA-2222-2025.doc WAKLE MANOJ JANARDHAN Date: 2025.07.04 11:11:10 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2222 OF 2025 IN INTERIM APPLICATION NO.144 OF 2025 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.229 OF 2024 Mohammed Salim Alam Shaikh ...Applicant Vs.

State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

------ Ms. Chandni Chawla, for the Applicant.

Ms. Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent-State. ------ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL & SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.

DATED : 30th JUNE, 2025 P.C. :- 1) This is an Application for modification of the Order dated 17th March, 2025 passed in Interim Application No.144 of 2025. Vide that Order the Applicant was directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/-, with one or two sureties in the like amount. 2) The Applicant was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mumbai in Sessions Case No.727 of 2021, for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The impugned Judgment and Order was passed on 30th October, 2023. The Applicant has 1/3

Manoj 7-IA-2222-2025.doc preferred Criminal Appeal No.229 of 2024 which is already admitted. He had filed Interim Application No.144 of 2025, in that Appeal for his release on bail. The Application was allowed and he was directed to be released on the above conditions. However, after that Order was passed on 17th March, 2025 till today he is unable to furnish the surety and in spite of the Order in his favour for bail, he is unable to avail of the same. In this situation the learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that, some reasonable period may be granted to him so that he can arrange for his sureties and till that time he may be directed to be released on an execution of the P.R. Bond. 3) Learned counsel relied on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 4 of 2021 as reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.

4) Learned APP submitted that the directions given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case can be followed. 5) We have considered these submissions. The difficulty expressed by the learned counsel for the Applicant appears to be genuine, because from 17th March 2025 till today, the Applicant remained in custody as he could not arrange for the sureties. Therefore, the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid case are applicable to the present case. Therefore, we are inclined to grant some time to the Applicant to furnish the surety and till then he can be directed to be released on the execution of P.R. Bond. Hence, the following Order. 2/3

Manoj 7-IA-2222-2025.doc :: ORDER ::

(a) The Applicant is directed to be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- for a period of eight weeks from his release. During that period, the Applicant shall furnish the sureties as directed by the Order dated 17th March, 2025. This Order shall operate for a period of eight weeks from the date of his release.

(b) The rest of the conditions mentioned in the Order dated 17th March, 2025 shall remain as they are. The Applicant shall follow all these conditions.

6) The Application is disposed of.

(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.) (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.) 3/3