Bombay High Court

SYED SHAKER ALI ALIAS SAJJAD ALI SAYED SHAMSHAD ALIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted as the co‑accused’s statement alone did not constitute sufficient material to justify the applicant's arrest.

Summary

The applicant sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (CR No. 144/2026) involving alleged contraband Gutka and Pan masala, charged under sections 123, 274, 275 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sections 26, 27 and 30(2) of the Foods Safety and Standards Act. A raid had seized the items and a co‑accused’s statement implicated the applicant, though no direct evidence was found against him and a charge‑sheet was filed only against the co‑accused. The applicant’s counsel argued that the co‑accused’s statement alone, especially after the charge‑sheet, was insufficient to justify custody, while the State contended that the statement warranted arrest for proper investigation. The court held that reliance solely on the co‑accused’s statement did not establish a prima facie case against the applicant and that his liberty warranted protection. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, including a personal bond, surety, attendance at the police station, and non‑interference with witnesses or evidence.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the only material against the applicant is a co‑accused’s statement.
Whether the applicant’s prior criminal history precludes anticipatory bail.
Whether the court may impose conditions on anticipatory bail in such circumstances.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 123, 274, 275, 3(5)
Foods Safety and Standards Act — s. 26, 27, 30(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
bail conditions
co‑accused statement
evidentiary insufficiency
contraband
food safety law
criminal procedure

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:37197
929-ABA-1356-2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1356 OF 2026

Syed Shaker Ali Alias Sajjad Ali Sayed Shamshad Ali
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
...
Mr. P. P. Giri, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. A. R. Kale, APP for the Respondent – State
...

CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J
DATE : AUGUST 19, 2026

P. C. :

1. Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with C.R. No.

144/2026 registered with Police Station Itwara, District Nanded for the

offences punishable under Sections 123, 274, 275 read with Section 3(5) of

the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 26, 27 and 30(2) of the

Foods Safety and Standards Act.

2. On 05.05.2026 raid was conducted and contraband Gutka and

Pan masala came to be seized at the instance of accused No.1. It is claimed

by the prosecution that Accused No. 1 made statement during the course of

investigation indicating the contraband articles being brought from the

present Applicant.

3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that though there is

criminal history against Applicant as one crime of similar nature registered

Page 1 of 3
929-ABA-1356-2026.odt

against him, it is his contention that in said case nothing was recovered from

the Applicant. It is his contention that now after conclusion of investigation,

charge-sheet came to be filed against co-accused and no evidence is

collected to show involvement of the Applicant in the crime.

4. Learned APP opposed grant of any protection to Applicant by

referring to the investigation papers, which according to him, show that co-

accused made statement with regard to involvement of the Applicant.

According to him, for the purpose of proper investigation, custody of the

Applicant is necessary.

5. Needless to say that statement of the co-accused is irrelevant

during the trial, however, for the purpose of investigation, investigating

agency may place reliance on the same. However, when the charge-sheet

has been filed on conclusion of investigation and if there is no other

material than the alleged statement of co-accused, it cannot be said that the

complicity of the Applicant in the crime in question is seen. Having regard to

the said fact, liberty of the Applicant deserves to be protected. Hence, the

order:

ORDER

(i) Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.

(ii) In the event of arrest of the Applicant in connection with C.R.
No. 144/2026 registered with Police Station Itwara, District
Nanded for the offences punishable under Sections 123, 274,

Page 2 of 3
929-ABA-1356-2026.odt

275 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and Sections 26, 27 and 30(2) of the Foods Safety and
Standards Act, he shall be released on bail on furnishing PR
bond of Rs. 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one
surety in the like amount.

(iii) He shall attend the concerned police station as and when
required.

(iv) He shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly.

(v) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner
whatsoever.

(vi) He is further directed to cooperate the investigating agency
for further investigation.

(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
Malani

Page 3 of 3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…