High Court · 2025
Legal Reasoning
61-ABA-860-2025.docIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 860 OF 2025Shoebakhtar Kausar MominVersusThe State of Maharashtra & Anr.-------------------------Mr. R. S. Deshmukh, Senior Advocate i/by Vishal Chavan for the Applicant.Mr. R. S. Wani, APP for the State.-------------------------CORAM :ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J. DATE :4 AUGUST 2025P. C.:1.This is an Application filed under Section 482 of the BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as the Applicant in the present proceedingsapprehends arrest.2.These proceedings arise out of CR No.0081 of 2025. The FIR islodged on 20 April 2025 at 13:51 hours by the Kingaon Police Station,District Latur. The date of occurrence of the alleged incident as stated in theFIR is 19 April 2025. The FIR has been registered under Sections 109,332(b), 189(2), 189(4), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115 and 351(2) of theBharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”). The informant is one GaneshGovind Dahifale, age 30 years, who is stated to be a farmer. There are 18accused persons as named in the FIR, of which two are unknown. AccusedNo.9 is the Applicant before this Court.3.The case of the complainant as noted in the FIR relates to anincident on the evening of 19 April 2025. The informant had visitedSavarkar Chowk, Kingaon at a pan stall, where he was for some time whenhe received a phone call from his mother. He started walking towards hishome, when on the left side of the road in front of Golden Boys clothingshubhamPage 1 of 5
Legal Reasoning
61-ABA-860-2025.docshop at around 9:00 p.m. a motorcyclist hit the informant, due to which hefell on the road. His phone fell from his hand and one of his slippers gotstuck in the said motorcycle. In a rage/anger, the informant stopped themotorcyclist and slapped him, who happened to be Aalim Bagwan Maulanafrom Kingaon. When the people around and the bystanders came to know ofthe said incident they started gathering and shouting, hurling abuses andthreatening the informant with dire consequences including death as he hitthe Maulana. On the said date at around 9:15 p.m. a group of about 40 to50 people forcibly entered the house of the informant. Persons specificallynamed in the FIR were armed with iron rods, iron bars and bill hook(saptur) and with such weapons, they attempted to kill the informantpunching him on his back and his stomach. When his mother came to rescuehim, she was also beaten and pushed, by grabbing her by the neck, breakingher necklace and causing her to fall on the ground. According to theinformant in addition to those persons in his house during the allegedattack/assault, the said Accused/Applicant was also present and theinformant can identify him if shown to the informant.4.With regard to the involvement of the presentAccused/Applicant, it appears that the investigation would reveal that oneSoheb Bhandewale i.e. the present Applicant is forthcoming in theinvestigation. In the FIR, Sohel Momin is the name of the presentApplicant/Accused. It transpired that the present Applicant Sohel Momin isthe same person as Soheb Momin Bhandewale. Though Mr. Deshmukh, Ld.senior counsel for the Applicant, has attempted to raise the contention ofmistaken identity, he would not labour on this aspect and would agree thatthe Applicant/Accused Sohel Momin is the same person.5.In the peculiar facts and circumstances, the role of the presentApplicant/Accused as stated in the FIR is not specific. It appears that he wasa part of the protesting mob. The informant claims to identify theshubhamPage 2 of 5 61-ABA-860-2025.docApplicant/Accused and several other assailants if shown to him. In thealleged attack in the house of the informant where specific persons arenamed to have attacked the informant and then his mother with allegedweapons, there is no specific mention of his name and/or role in this regard.Pertinently, during the hearing of the Application on 1 August 2025 when itwas placed for Directions, Mr. Wani, Ld. APP would fairly submit that as faras the alleged offence under Section 109 of the BNS is concerned, in thepresent factual conspectus, it does not apply to this Applicant. According tohim Section 332(b) of the BNS which deals with house trespass, wouldapply to the Applicant/Accused. However, the facts as disclosed in the FIRleaves this as a gray area as the informant states that he would be able toidentify this Applicant when shown to him. All other sections invokingoffences including being part of unlawful assembly are evidently bailable.The statement of the eye witness furnished by the Ld. APP from the casediary/investigation would prima facie reveal that the Applicant/Accused wassighted as part of the mob inter alia engaged in sloganeering who gatheredon 19 April 2025 to protest against the incident in support of the saidMaulana, who later left the spot after the police arrived, after which the saideye witness entered the house of the informant when he saw him injured.Pertinent it is to also note that the Injury Certificate which is stated to bebased on specialist opinion of the primary health center, Kingaon of theInformant when he was examined on 19 April 2025 shows nature of injuriesas Simple Injuries-multiple CLW, CLW, Blunt Trauma.6.Thus, in the above factual matrix and for the reasons recordedabove the nature of allegations qua this Applicant whose identity wasinitially in doubt, are not specific but vague, most of the alleged offencesinvoked in the FIR as noted above are bailable and the nature of injuries alsoappear to be Simple Injuries. For such reasons, prosecution has fallen shortof making out a prima facie case against this Applicant. As the Applicant isshubhamPage 3 of 5 61-ABA-860-2025.docyet to be specifically identified which can be a part of the TI Parade whenconducted, physical custody of this Applicant at this stage, though insistedby the prosecution, may not serve the purpose. The Applicant hasundertaken to fully co-operate with the investigation and abide by the termsand conditions that this Court may consider imposing in the given facts andcircumstances.7.It is also to be noted that the Applicant is a practicing lawyerwho as Mr. Deshmukh, Ld. senior counsel urged ought not to be subjected tothe stigma of arrest in the given factual matrix. Having noted so, the court isequally constrained to sound a word of caution. Lawyers as rightly portrayedare the foot soldiers of our Constitution and the laws. They should be true totheir responsibilities, image, larger societal role as envisaged under theAdvocates Act and Rules framed thereunder and refrain from engaging inactivities which would fall within contours of an offence under ourjurisprudence. Though this Court in the given factual complexion, is inclinedto exercise discretion in favour of this Applicant, it is made clear that grantof ABA being an exception and not the rule, the same indulgence may not beextended in future, if at all occasion so arises, inter alia on the ground thathe is a lawyer, who are watch guards of the rule of law and certainly notabove the law.8.For the reasons above, the following Order would in my opinionmeet the ends of justice:- ORDER(i)In the event of arrest of the Applicant in connection with CRNo.0081 of 2025 registered with Kingaon Police Station,District Latur for the offences punishable under Sections 109,332(b), 189(2), 189(4), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115 and 351(2)of the BNS, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail onhis furnishing PR bond in the sum of Rs.20,000 (RupeesshubhamPage 4 of 5 61-ABA-860-2025.docTwenty Thousand Only) with one or more sureties in the likeamount.(ii)The Applicant shall cooperate with the investigation and shallattend the concerned police station on upcoming Friday i.e. 8August 2025 and Saturday i.e. 9 August 2025 followed by twoconsecutive Saturdays i.e. 16 August 2025 and 23 August2025 at 11:30 a.m. and then as and when required by theInvestigating Officer, until filing of the charge-sheet.(iii)The Applicant shall furnish details of residential address andother contact details such as mobile number etc. to theconcerned police station. If there is any change in the contactdetails, the same shall be immediately intimated to theconcerned police station. (iv)The Applicant shall not leave the jurisdiction of the Courtwithout prior permission/order of the Court, until the furtherorders and/or filing of the charge-sheet.(v)The Applicant shall not in any manner whatsoever contactany of the accused persons in the present proceedings and/orany other witnesses and shall not influence the witness/esand/or tamper evidence in any manner whatsoever.9.Needless to mention that the observations are prima facie forthe purposes of the adjudication of this Anticipatory Bail Application.10.The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed in the above terms.[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]shubhamPage 5 of 5