Bombay High Court
AKHATAR KARIM SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
- Bench
- R M JOSHI
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted as no evidence other than the co-accused's statement connects the applicant to the alleged offences, making his antecedents irrelevant.
Summary
The applicant sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case involving the seizure of a large quantity of contraband gutkha, alleged under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Food Safety and Standards Act. The FIR links the applicant to the crime solely through the statement of a co-accused, with no other material evidence. The applicant argued that the co-accused's statement lacks evidentiary value and that, absent further proof, his liberty should be protected despite alleged criminal antecedents. The State contended that the seriousness of the offence, the quantity seized, and the applicant's past record warranted denial of bail. The court held that, since no additional evidence connects the applicant to the offence, the co-accused's statement alone cannot justify denial of bail, rendering antecedents irrelevant, and consequently granted anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the only link to the accused is the statement of a co-accused without corroborating evidence.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 123, 223, 274, 275
- Food Safety and Standards Act — s. 26(2)(i), 26(2)(ii), 26(2)(iv), 30(2)(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- evidentiary value
- co-accused statement
- contraband gutkha
- Food Safety Act
- criminal antecedents
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:27451
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1401 OF 2025
AKHATAR KARIM SHAIKH
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
…
Ms. Ranjita R. Barhate, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. A. V. Lawate, APP for the Respondent/State
CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATED : 10th JULY, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. The applicant apprehends arrest in connection with Crime
No.0427/2024, registered with Pachod Police Station, District Chhatrapati
Sambhajinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 123, 223, 274, 275
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Sections 26(2)(i), 26(2)(ii), 26(2)
(iv), 30(2)(a) of the Food Safety and Standards Act.
2. The First Information Report indicates that a raid was conducted in
which a considerably huge quantity of contraband gutkha was seized from the
co-accused. On the basis of the statement of the co-accused, the prosecution
seeks to implicate the present applicant in the crime. The applicant is alleged
to be a supplier of the contraband gutkha.
ABA 1401.2025.odt 1 of 3
3. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that, except for the alleged
statement of the co-accused, there is no evidence to connect the applicant
with the crime. It is further argued that the statement of the co-accused has
no evidentiary value and, in the absence of any other connecting evidence, the
involvement of the applicant in the crime cannot be presumed. It is further
argued that though antecedents are alleged against the applicant, in the
absence of any evidence showing his involvement in the crime, his liberty
deserves to be protected.
4. Learned APP opposed the grant of relief to the applicant by citing the
seriousness of the crime as well as the quantity of contraband seized at the
instance of the co-accused. It is his submission that the statement of the co-
accused may not be relevant at the trial; however, it can be considered by the
Investigating Agency during the course of investigation. He submits that the
applicant has criminal antecedents and, therefore, the application deserves to
be rejected.
5. Prima facie, a perusal of the record indicates that the contraband
gutkha was seized from the co-accused. No doubt, the statement of the co-
accused would be relevant for the purpose of further investigation. However,
during the course of investigation, no further evidence has been collected
against the present applicant showing any connection between the applicant
ABA 1401.2025.odt 2 of 3
and the co-accused. In the absence of any such evidence, it cannot be held, at
this stage, that the applicant is connected with the crime in question. Once it
is so held, the antecedents of the applicant become irrelevant. Hence, the
application is allowed in terms of interim order.
( R. M. JOSHI, J.)
ssp
ABA 1401.2025.odt 3 of 3
Checking your session…