MOHAMMED ZAID KHAN @ PERU S/O AKBAR KHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                            919-ABA-2353-2026

Harish

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
     ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2353 OF 2026

Mohammed Zaid Khan @ Peru S/O Akbar Khan                    ...Applicant
           V/S.
State Of Maharashtra                                        ...Respondent
_____________________________________________________________
Adv. Satyasam R. Gaud a/w Maniram R. Gaud, Pranav Mhatre, for the
Applicant.
Adv. Prasanna P. Malashe, APP for the Respondent – State.
PI - Mr. Atul Sonawane and PSI Mr. Ashok Jadhav, Dongri Police Station,
Brihanmumbai are present.
________________________________________________________
                       CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
                       DATE : 03RD SEPTEMBER, 2026.

P.C. :-

1.        Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for

the respondent.

2.        The applicant has filed the instant application seeking pre-

arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 255 of 2026, dated 13.04.2026

registered with Dongri Police Station, Bhrihanmumbai, for offence

under Sections 109, 118(1), 189(2), 191(1), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2)

(3), 61(2), 126(2) and 238(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023


                                   1/5
                                                          919-ABA-2353-2026

(for short ‘BNS’) and Sections 37(1)(a) and 135 of the Maharashtra

Police Act.

3.        Learned counsel for the applicant points out that the only role

attributed to this applicant is about instigation of the group of people

who have attacked the victim by chairs, wooden sticks etc. which were

lying on the side of the road. He states that thus the only role of this

applicant is his presence at alleged site and alleged instigation. Apart

from this, he invites attention to another alleged role as reflected from

the spot panchanama dated 13th April, 2026 about the applicant's

attempt to carry a DVR machine with him, which was installed at the

adjacent building by name 'Amir Building' which has captured the

CCTV footage of the incident. He states that although, it is referred in

the spot panchanama that this applicant has taken away the DVR

machine, there are no complaints/reports by anybody from Amir

Building about the entry of this applicant in their building or the act of

taking away the DVR machine. Apart from this, learned counsel for the

applicant submits that out of total seven accused persons, three accused

persons have been released on regular bail and three on anticipatory

bail. He also states that the charge-sheet is already filed and the

custodial interrogation is not required.


                                   2/5
                                                         919-ABA-2353-2026

4.        Learned APP points out that the presence of the applicant on

the site is clear in view of the allegations in FIR. Apart from this, he

states that the CCTV footage shows his presence. It is submitted that

the DVR machine was installed in the building in which one of the

other accused person resides and therefore the applicant had easy

access to the said building with the assistance of the said co-accused.

He also states that one of the other co-accused person has revealed the

fact that this applicant has taken away the DVR machine, which

amounts to tampering with the evidence.

5.        After perusal of the FIR and the allegations made therein it

appears that the only role attributed to this applicant is about

instigation of the group. There are no allegations of any attack by this

applicant. It has also to be noted that the investigation is completed and

charge-sheet is already filed against other accused persons. Further, out

of seven accused persons, three accused persons have been released on

regular bail and three on anticipatory bail.

6.        As regards the contentions about taking away the DVR

machine, the same is part of investigation and in any case it would only

reveal that the applicant was present at the relevant time. Considering

the fact that the applicant has attended the police station in accordance


                                   3/5
                                                           919-ABA-2353-2026

with the interim protection order, the custodial interrogation of this

applicant need not be insisted upon and accordingly the interim

protection needs to be confirmed, subject to certain conditions.

7.       Hence, I pass the following order .

                              : ORDER :

              (i) The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.

              (ii) In the event of arrest of the applicant in Crime

              No. 255 of 2026, dated 13.04.2026 registered

              with Dongri Police Station, Bhrihanmumbai,

              for offence under Sections 109, 118(1), 189(2),

              191(1), 190, 115(2), 352, 351(2)(3), 61(2),

              126(2) and 238(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya

              Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) and Sections

              37(1)(a) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police

              Act, he be released on bail on furnishing P. R.

              Bond of        Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five

              Thousand only) with one solvent surety of the

              like amount.

              (iii) The applicant is directed to cooperate in the

              investigation to be conducted against him.

                                   4/5
                                                         919-ABA-2353-2026

               (iv) The applicant shall not pressurize any of the

               prosecution witnesses.



9.        The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed and

disposed of.

                                   (PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)




                                   5/5