FATIMA DAWOOD MERCHANT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PERUSED the order dated 27 4 2000 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sessions Court, Mumbai, refusing bail to the applicant and the affidavit of Sr. Inspector of Police, Mr. A.B. Bagadi, attached to the D.C.B. Unit No. VII, CID. Mumbai.

(2.) THIS is an application for bail in a case under Sections 302,307,397 read with 34 and 120B, IPC and Sections 3,25 and 27 of the Arms Act. On 12 8 1997 at 11.15 a.m. one Ram Lavangare, Chairman of Shiva Temple situated at Jeet nagar, Versova, Andheri (W) Mumbai lodged an FIR at D.N. Nagar, police station on the basis of which C.R. No. 572 of 1997 for the offences referred to above, was registered. In the FIR, it was alleged that on the said date at about 10.15 a.m. some unidentified persons killed Gulshan Kumar Due near Shiva temple by using fire arms and as a consequence of the firing, four others were also injured.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Mr. Naik, learned counsel for the applicant strenuously urged that the charge sheet shows that the applicant has been charged and the role of firing upon the deceased and killing him has not been assigned to her. He also urged that since the applicant is a lady, she would be entitled to the beneficial provisions contained in the provision to Section 437 (1) Cr.P.C. He finally urged that since extradition proceedings in respect of co accused Nadeem Shaikh are pending in England and a final decision on them does not appear around the corner, it would take a considerable time before the trial of the applicant commences. Mr. Naik urged that cumulatively the said circumstances entitle the applicant to bail.