SAIJUDDIN HARUN QURESHI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned senior counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the Respondents- State.

(2.) This is the second bail application preferred by the applicant seeking his enlargement on bail in connection with C.R.No.30 of 2019 registered with the DCB, CID, Unit-II, Mumbai, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code .

(3.) Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submits that the change of circumstance warranting filing of the aforesaid application is grant of bail to accused No.3 - Wakil Ahmed Yasin Shaikh on 23 rd October, 2020. He submits that even otherwise there is no material to connect the applicant with the alleged offences. He submits that admittedly the applicant was not present at the spot at the time of the alleged incident and that there is no material to throw light on the point of conspiracy to kill the deceased - Aklakh Khan. He submits that there was no motive for the applicant to kill the deceased nor is there any material to show that the applicant knew the deceased. He submits that the applicant has no antecedents and that the applicant is in custody in the said case since 2019. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the statement of Shahid Rafiq Khan @ Shahenshah does not throw any light on the aspect of conspiracy. He submits that in the meeting that took place on 13 th January, 2014 at about 11.30 p.m., the issue of payment of money for releasing a person on bail was resolved, after which accused No.3 - Wakil Shaikh and deceased - Aklakh Khan left together, after which Aklakh Khan called Shahid Rafiq Khan @ Shahenshah and asked him to meet him on the next day and that within a few minutes thereafter, the police informed Shahid Khan @ Shahenshah that Aklakh Khan had met with an accident. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered at the instance of the applicant.