NASIR HUSAIN SALIMULLAH ANSARI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant/accused in Crime No.527 of 2017 registered with Police Station Goregaon, District Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 323, 324, 326, 143, 147, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Sections 37 and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, by this application, is seeking pre-arrest bail.

(2.) Heard the learned advocate appearing for the applicant/accused. He drew my attention to the First Information Report (FIR) to point out that there is no iota of evidence to connect the applicant/accused to the offence punishable under Sections 302 read with 149 of the IPC. In his submissions, the applicant/accused being the owner of the concerned Hukka Parlour, had just driven out the members of both groups from his Hukka Parlour as both groups were indulged in quarreling and scuffle inside the parlour.

(3.) Upon being questioned on this aspect after examining the FIR, the learned APP vehemently argued, on instructions of the Officer present in the court, that the applicant/accused had committed the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 149 of the IPC. For that purpose, the learned APP is relying on statement of Vinay Naik, Mutthu, Ninad Surve etc. I have perused statement of all witnesses recorded by the Investigator in the case up till now, by taking the case diary from the learned APP.