Mohammed Arif Kamruddin v. The State of Maharashtra
Case at a glance
Outcome
Bail granted
to stay after he is enlarged on bail
Provisions considered
- Arms Act, 1959 ss. 3, 7, 25, 27
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Application stands disposed of accordingly. - 5 - JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE
Judgment
the Sessions Court is unsustainable in law.
#5. During the course of hearing some of the papers showing permanent residential address of the applicant were shown, zerox copies of which were also filed on record, the copies of which were also given to the learned A.P.P. for verification. The learned A.P.P., after going through the papers, on instruction from the investigating officer, confirms that the - 3 - applicant with his wife is staying at the address given in the application. Statements of the neighbours were also recorded who also confirmed about his residence.
#6. In the above view of the matter, the applicant, who was already on bail and was arrested thereafter, would be entitled to bail. In these circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant, however, subject to following stringent conditions: (a) The applicant, arrested in connection with C.R.No.24/2007 registered with D.C.B., C.I.D., Mumbai shall be enlarged on bail on his executing P.R.Bond of Rs.10,000/- with two local solvent sureties to make up the said amount. (b) The applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station twice a week, i.e. on every Monday and Friday between 4.00 to 5.00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial. He shall co-operate with the investigating agency for disposal of the case. (c) The order of bail will be given effect - 4 - only after the applicant furnishes to the investigating officer the details about his place of residence and address where he proposes to stay after he is enlarged on bail. The applicant will not change his residential address thereafter till the conclusion of trial without prior intimation to the investigating officer. (d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement or threat or pressurise any prosecution witnesses and shall not in any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence. (e) It is needless to mention that breach of any of the conditions by the applicant shall result in cancellation of bail. (f) Any observation made in this order shall not be construed as finding or expression on merits of the case at the time of trial.
#7. Application stands disposed of accordingly. - 5 - JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: to stay after he is enlarged on bail
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Arms Act, 1959 — ss. 3, 7, 25, 27; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 439.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 09 Oct 2007. The bench was V C DAGA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.