Mohammed Ismail Mohammed Ashraf Shaikh @ Chintu v. State Of Maharashtra

1 902-ABA 472-26.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.472 OF 2026 Mohammed Ismail Mohammed Ashraf Shaikh @ Chintu ... Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent ----- Ms. Misbaah Solkar for the Applicant.

Mr. B. V. Holambe Patil, APP for the Respondent-State. PI Sachin Gawde, Trombay PS is present.

----- CORAM :

N.R. BORKAR, J.

DATE :

05TH MARCH 2026 P.C. :

1.

This is an Application for anticipatory bail. Digitally signed by MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE Date:

2026.03.06 19:18:53 +0530 MUGDHA MANOJ PARANJAPE 2.

The Applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.547 of 2025 registered with Trombay Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(2), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 189(2), 189(4), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 25 of the Indian Arms Act.

3.

It is the case of the prosecution that on the date of incident, which took place on 23rd November 2025, on account of certain financial dispute, the present Applicant alongwith other co-accused assaulted the first informant with a sword as well as fist and kick blows and attempted to commit his murder. It is alleged that the wife and the friend of the first informant was also assaulted with fist and kick blows by the Applicant and other co-accused.

Mugdha

2 902-ABA 472-26.doc 4.

I have heard Learned Counsel for the Applicant and Learned APP for the Respondent-State.

5.

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that there is a cross FIR in relation to the alleged incident. It is submitted that the medical evidence, i.e., the injury certificate is not consistent with the version of the first informant as the nature of injuries is simple. It is further submitted that the Applicant, at the time of incident, was not armed with any weapon and therefore there is no need of custodial interrogation of the Applicant.

6.

On the other hand, Learned APP for the Respondent-State submits that the Applicant is involved in serious crime of attempt to murder. It is submitted that the brother of the Applicant was armed with a sword. It is submitted that specific overt act is attributed to the present Applicant. It is submitted that the Applicant is involved in seven more crimes, out of which most of the crimes are of assault including assault on a police officer. It is submitted that considering the nature of crime, the Applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail.

7.

I have perused the FIR. There is a specific overt act attributed to the present Applicant in the crime in question. The Applicant is involved in seven more crimes. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to release the Applicant on anticipatory bail. Hence, the present Anticipatory Bail Application is rejected. (N.R. BORKAR, J.) Mugdha