Bombay High Court

MOHAMMED ABDUL RAZZAKversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 28 September 2026
Disposal: ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The anticipatory bail was confirmed and the application was allowed.

Summary

The applicant, Mohammed Abdul Razzak, faced an FIR (No. 1165 of 2026) for cheating. He contended that the investigation revealed he did not commit the alleged acts and that the investigating officer had already filed a C‑Summary before the magistrate. The State, through its counsel, concurred that the C‑Summary was filed. The court examined whether there was any apprehension of arrest warranting the continuance of anticipatory bail. Finding no such apprehension, the court confirmed the interim protection previously granted on 1 September 2026, allowing the anticipatory bail application and disposing of the matter.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate disposition of an anticipatory bail application when a C‑Summary has been filed indicating lack of sufficient evidence?

Subjects

anticipatory bail
cheating
C‑Summary
criminal procedure
FIR

Judgment

                                                   18-ABA-2473-2026.ODT




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
         ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2473 OF 2026
Mr. Mohammed Abdul Razzak                             …Applicant
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra And Anr.                     …Respondents


Adv. Tariq Khan, for Applicant.

Mr. Bapu V. Holambe - Patil, A.P. P., for Respondent – State.

PSI R. T. Dalvi, Mumbra Police Station, Thane, is present.


                      CORAM :          PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
                      DATE        :    28TH SEPTEMBER 2026
P. C:-

1.       Learned counsel for applicant submits that although the

offence bearing FIR No. 1165 of 2026 was registered against

this applicant, during investigation it had transpired that the

applicant had not committed the alleged acts of cheating. He

submits that the Investigating Officer has already filed ‘C-

Summary’ before the Magistrate.

2.       Learned APP for respondent – State, on instructions from

the Investigating Officer, also submits that ‘C-Summary’ is

already filed before the Magistrate.




                                  Page 1 of 2
                             th
                          28 September 2026
                                                      18-ABA-2473-2026.ODT




3.          In view of the above, there is no reason for apprehension

of arrest and interim protection granted by this Court by order

dated 1st September 2026 needs to be confirmed. Accordingly,

instant application is allowed and disposed of.




                                           (PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
VDMokal/-




                                     Page 2 of 2
                                th
                              28 September 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

Tariq Khan