Bombay High Court
MOHD JAVEED GULAM MOHIUDDINversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- APPLICATION ALLOWED
Holding
Bail is granted because the investigation is complete and the injuries are simple, with the risk of tampering addressable through stringent conditions.
Summary
Amjad @ Pappu was arrested for assaulting a relative with a sword, an offence under Sections 109, 324(4), 115(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution highlighted the use of a deadly weapon, recovery of the sword and the accused's prior conviction, arguing that bail would risk witness tampering. The defence contended that the victim's injuries were simple, the investigation was complete, a charge‑sheet had been filed and further custodial interrogation was unnecessary. The Court held that the completed investigation and the nature of the injuries outweighed the prosecution’s concerns, which could be mitigated by strict bail conditions. Accordingly, bail was granted on personal recognizance with a Rs.15,000 bond and conditions restricting movement, reporting, and prohibiting tampering or intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be denied in an assault case involving a deadly weapon despite simple injuries and completed investigation.
- Whether the accused's prior conviction and risk of witness tampering justify refusal of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 324(4), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- bail
- assault
- deadly weapon
- simple injury
- prior conviction
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- witness tampering
- personal recognizance bond
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:23730
947-BA-900-26.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
947 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 900 OF 2026
Amjad @ Pappu S/o. Ajmal Khan
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1850 OF 2026 IN BA/900/2026
Mohd Javeed Gulam Mohiuddin
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra and Another
......
Mr. PP. Giri, Advocate h/f Mr. Y.G. Kasod, Advocate for Applicant
Mr. S.A. Gaikwad, APP for Respondent-State
Mr. G.R. Syed, Advocate for the Assist to APP
......
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 17 JUNE, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard learned counsel Mr. P.P. Giri, Advocate holding for Mr. Y.G.
Kasod, for the applicant, learned APP for respondent-State and learned
counsel Mr. G.R. Syed for assisting the APP.
2. Criminal Application No.1850 of 2026 is filed seeking permission to
assist the learned APP. For the reasons stated therein, the application is
allowed. The applicant therein is permitted to assist the learned APP. The
application stands disposed of accordingly.
947-BA-900-26.odt
2
3. By the present application, the applicant seeks his release on bail in
connection with Crime No. 456 of 2025 registered with Shivajinagar Police
Station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 109,
324(4), 115(2), 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the crime came to be
registered on the basis of a report lodged by one Moij Mohiuddin alleging
that the applicant assaulted Mohammad Javed, cousin of the informant, by
means of a sword. It is submitted that though allegations are made
regarding assault by a deadly weapon, the injuries sustained by the injured
have ultimately been certified to be simple in nature. Learned counsel
further submits that the investigation is complete and charge-sheet has
already been filed. The applicant is in custody since 13.02.2026. According
to him, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary. He
submits that the applicant is ready and willing to abide by any condition
that may be imposed by this Court. On these grounds, he seeks grant of bail.
5. Per contra, learned APP and learned counsel assisting the
prosecution strongly oppose the application. They submit that the applicant
had actively participated in the assault and inflicted sword blows on the
victim. The weapon used in the commission of the offence has also been
recovered. It is further submitted that the applicant has criminal antecedents
and was convicted in Sessions Case No.24 of 2014. According to them,
considering the specific role attributed to the applicant and the nature of the
947-BA-900-26.odt
3
allegations, no case for grant of bail is made out. They further apprehend
that, if released on bail, the applicant may influence prosecution witnesses
and indulge in similar activities. Hence, they pray for rejection of the
application.
6. have considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for
the applicant, learned APP for the State and learned counsel assisting the
prosecution. I have also perused the FIR, charge-sheet and the material
placed on record.
7. However, the material collected during investigation indicates that
the injuries sustained by the injured have been opined to be simple in
nature. The investigation is complete and charge-sheet has already been
filed. The applicant has been in custody since 13.02.2026. Therefore, his
further custodial of the applicant is not necessary. Though the prosecution
has pointed out the antecedents of the applicant and the recovery of the
weapon, those circumstances cannot be grounds to deny bail indefinitely,
particularly when the investigation is over and the injuries suffered by the
injured are simple in nature. The apprehension expressed by the prosecution
regarding tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses can be
adequately addressed by imposing stringent conditions. Hence, the
following order:
ORDER
I. The application is allowed.
947-BA-900-26.odt
4
II. Applicant – Amjad @ Pappu S/o Ajmal Khan be released on bail in
connection with Crime No. 0456 of 2025 registered with Shivajinagar Police
Station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 109,
324(4), 115(2), 352, 3(5) of of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on
executing a Personal Recognizance Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount, subject to the
following conditions:
(a) Till conclusion of the trial, the applicants shall not enter the
territorial limits of District Nanded except for attending the proceedings
before the Trial Court.
(b) The applicants shall furnish to the Investigating Officer their mobile
numbers and complete residential addresses of the place where they intend
to reside outside District Nanded and shall keep the Investigating Officer
informed of any change therein.
(c) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and
shall not threaten or induce prosecution witness.
(d) In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, it shall be
open for the prosecution to move the competent Court for cancellation of
bail.
III. Needless to state that the observations made herein are prima facie
in nature and confined to the adjudication of the present bail application.
The Trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made in
this order while deciding the case on its own merits.
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
S P Rane
Checking your session…