Hafiz Khan Bhure Khan Pathan v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Pso Ps Ranapratap Nagar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 508 OF 2026 Jagruti Dhanesh Thorat ... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ____________________________________________________________ by NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Date:

2026.03.12 10:36:35 +0530 NILAM SANTOSH KAMBLE Mr.Prashant Pandey a/w Mr.Sumati Gupta, Ms.Ridhima Mangaokar and Mr.Dinesh Jadhvani, for the Applicant.

Mr.Mahesh Mule, SPP a/w Ms.Nidhi Narvekar and Mr.B.B. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State.

____________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 10th MARCH 2026 P.C. :

.

By this Application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.159 of 2022 registered with Nhavasheva Police Station, Navi Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 364(A), 386, 120(B), 342, 323, 109, 506(2) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC' for short), Sections 3 and 25 Arms Act and Section 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) and 3(5) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 ('MCOCA' for short).

2.

It is prosecution's case that First Informant was kidnapped by the co-accused and by putting pistol on his head, ransom was demanded from the First Informant. It is alleged that, First Informant paid ransom as alleged by the co-accused. It is alleged that the Applicant is the sister of gang leader. She harboured the co-accused despite being aware that coaccused were involved in the commission of the offence. It is alleged that the amount received from the stone crushing quarry was transferred in bank account of the Applicant, the said amount is crime proceed. 3.

The learned counsel further submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court has dealt with all issue's made against the Applicant and granted bail to the Applicant in the similar crime.

4.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the Applicant is behind bars for more than two years. She is lady. There is no progress in trial. It may take time to conclude the trial, and requested to allow the Application.

5.

It is contention of learned SPP that charge has been framed against the Applicant. Trial is in progress. The Applicant was actively involved in the commission of crime as proceeds of crime were transferred in her bank account. If the Applicant released on bail, she

may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses, and requested to reject the Application.

6.

I have heard both learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record.

7.

A similar crime was registered against the Applicant and coaccused. The Bail Application of the Applicant in the said crime was rejected by this Court. It was challenged before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court has granted bail to the Applicant. The allegations in the said crime and present crime are almost similar. The allegations against the Applicant are of harbouring the co-Accused. To prove the involvement of the Applicant in present crime evidence is required. Applicant is lady and she is behind bars for more than two years. It may take time to conclude the trial. 8.

In view of above, I pass following order.

ORDER

(i) The Applicant be released Crime No.159 of 2022 registered with Nhavasheva Police Station, Navi Mumbai, on cash bail of Rs.50,000/-. The Applicant shall furnish surety

of the same amount within two months after being releasing from jail.

(ii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.

(iii) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

(iv) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station as and when required.

(v) Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)