Bombay High Court
ALIM RAHIM SHAHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
- Bench
- R M JOSHI
Holding
In the absence of any evidence linking the applicant to the offence, the anticipatory bail application is allowed and the applicant’s antecedents are deemed irrelevant.
Summary
Alim Rahim Shah applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in Crime No.0059/2025 concerning a large seizure of contraband gutkha. The prosecution’s case rests solely on the statement of a co‑accused, alleging Shah to be a supplier, with no other material linking him to the offence. Shah contended that the co‑accused’s statement lacks evidentiary value and, absent any further proof, his liberty must be protected despite alleged criminal antecedents. The State argued that the seriousness of the offence and the quantity seized justified denial of bail. The Court examined the record and found no additional evidence connecting Shah to the crime, rendering his antecedents irrelevant at this stage. Consequently, the Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, directing conditions for release if arrested.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the only incriminating material is the statement of a co‑accused.
- Whether the co‑accused’s statement has evidentiary value at the bail stage.
- Whether alleged criminal antecedents can be considered in denying anticipatory bail in the absence of connecting evidence.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 123, 223, 274, 275 r/w 3(5)
- Food Safety and Standards Act — s. 26(2), 26(2)(a), 27(3)(d), 27(3)(e), 59
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- contraband gutkha
- co‑accused statement
- evidentiary value
- criminal antecedents
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Food Safety and Standards Act
- bail conditions
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:27443
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 338 OF 2026
ALIM RAHIM SHAH
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
…
Mr. Sharad S. Solanke, 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.0059/2025, registered with Rahata Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for
the offences punishable under Sections, 123, 223, 274, 275 r/w 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Sections 26(2), 26(2)(a), 27(3)(d), 27(3)
(e) and 59 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 338.2026.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 338.2026.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
order:
ORDER
(i) Application is allowed.
(ii) In the event of arrest of applicant in connection with
Crime No.0059/2025, registered with Rahata Police Station,
District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under
Sections, 123, 223, 274, 275 r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita and under Sections 26(2), 26(2)(a), 27(3)(d), 27(3)
(e) and 59 of the Food Safety and Standards Act, he shall be
released on bail on furnishing PR Bond of Rs.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the
like amount.
(iii) He shall attend the concerned police station as and
when called by the Investigating Officer.
(iv) He shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly.
(v) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner
whatsoever.
(vi) He further directed to cooperate the investigating
agency for further investigation.
6. Learned APP for the Respondent/State to communicate this order to
the concerned Police Station.
( R. M. JOSHI, J.)
ssp
ABA 338.2026.odt 3 of 3
Checking your session…