ABDUL NABI HANIF PATELversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2026:BHC-AUG:42012
                                                 -1-
                                                                     BA-1564-2026

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             BAIL APPLICATION NO.1564 OF 2026

              Abdul Nabi Hanif Patel,
              Age : 32 years, Occu. : At present in jail,
              R/o. Santoshi Mata Rickshaw Stop,
              Raza Colony, Mehrun, Jalgaon,
              Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon.                               … Applicant
                                                                   (Accused)
                          Versus

              The State of Maharashtra,
              Through Investigation Officer,
              Bhusawal Bazaar Peth Police Station,
              Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon.                       … Respondent

                                              ..…
              Mr. Himmatsinh D. Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicant.
              Mr. S. D. Ghayal, APP for Respondent/State.
                                              ..…

                                           CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                                            DATED : 09th SEPTEMBER 2026
              ORDER :

              1.        This is an application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya

              Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in connection

              with Crime No. I-14 of 2025 registered with Bhusawal Bazaar Peth

              Police Station, District Jalgaon, for the offences punishable under

              Sections 103, 61(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 3(5) and 238 of the

              Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 3/25, 7/25 and 27 of the

              Arms Act and Sections 37(1)(3) read with Section 135 of the

              Maharashtra Police Act. The applicant is accused No.2. He was

              arrested on 12 January 2025 and is in custody since then.
                                 -2-
                                                         BA-1564-2026

Investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has been filed on 9 th

April 2025.


2.      The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 10th January

2025 at about 7.15 a.m., deceased Tehrin Ahmed Nasir Ahmed

Sheikh had gone to D.D. Super Cold Drinks and Tea House at Jam

Mohalla, Bhusawal. It is alleged that certain accused persons,

armed with firearms, entered the tea stall and fired at the

deceased, resulting in firearm injuries and his death. According to

the prosecution, the incident was the outcome of a conspiracy

amongst the accused. The FIR was registered on the same day. The

applicant was not named in the FIR. His complicity is alleged to

have surfaced during the course of investigation on the basis of the

CCTV footage and statements subsequently recorded.


3.      Learned counsel for the applicant submits that neither the

FIR nor the initial version of the incident attributes any overt act

to the applicant. His name surfaced subsequently and the material

relied upon by the prosecution essentially relates to his

identification in the CCTV footage. It is submitted that there is no

recovery of any firearm or other incriminating article from the

applicant. It is further submitted that accused Nos.5, 6 and 7,

namely Abid Aslam Patel, Salman Abdul Majid Patel and Wasim

Majid Patel, have already been released on bail. According to the
                                -3-
                                                        BA-1564-2026

learned counsel, the allegations against some of the said accused

are not on a footing materially different from those against the

applicant and, therefore, the applicant is entitled to parity. It is

further submitted that the applicant has remained incarcerated

since 12th January 2025, investigation is over, charge-sheet has

been filed, trial has not made substantial progress and the

applicant has no criminal antecedents.


4.      Learned APP opposes the application. It is submitted that

the offence is grave and concerns a pre-planned murder committed

by use of firearms. The prosecution relies upon the CCTV footage

from the place of occurrence. According to the prosecution, a

person wearing a blue jacket is seen in the company of the other

assailants, entering the tea stall and thereafter emerging from it,

and is also seen with a firearm. The said person has been identified

as the present applicant in the statements recorded during

investigation. It is therefore submitted that the case of the

applicant cannot be equated with the co-accused who have been

released on bail merely because the applicant was not named in the

FIR.


5.      I have considered the rival submissions and perused the

material placed on record. The accusation is undoubtedly serious.

The nature of the offence, however, cannot by itself conclude the
                                  -4-
                                                          BA-1564-2026

consideration of an application for bail. The Court is required to

examine, prima facie, the nature of the material against the

particular accused, his role, period of incarceration, stage of the

proceedings, possibility of the trial being concluded within a

reasonable period and the position of similarly situated co-accused.


6.       It is true that the applicant was not named in the FIR.

That circumstance, by itself, is not decisive because the

investigation may legitimately reveal the involvement of a person

not initially named. The material subsequently collected by the

investigating agency, therefore, cannot be ignored merely because

the applicant's name does not occur in the FIR. In the present case,

the prosecution relies upon the CCTV footage and the statements

identifying the person wearing a blue jacket as the applicant. The

CCTV script, as relied upon by the prosecution, indicates the

presence of such person with the other assailants immediately

before and after the incident and also refers to a firearm being

carried by him. Thus, at this stage, it would not be appropriate to

accept the submission that there is absolutely no incriminating

material against the applicant.


7.       However, the Court is presently concerned with bail and

not with recording a finding as to guilt. The evidentiary value of the

identification of the applicant from the CCTV footage, the precise
                                -5-
                                                        BA-1564-2026

acts attributable to him and the extent to which the prosecution

can establish common intention or conspiracy are matters which

would necessarily be tested at the trial. No firearm is shown to

have been recovered from the applicant. There is also no material

placed before this Court to indicate any criminal antecedents of the

applicant.


8.      The plea of parity also deserves consideration, though

parity in matters of bail is not to be applied mechanically merely

because another accused has been released. What is material is

whether the nature of the accusation, role attributed and

incriminating material against the accused seeking bail are broadly

comparable. Accused Nos.5, 6 and 7 have already been enlarged on

bail. The charge-sheet itself attributes to accused No.5 the role of

keeping watch upon the deceased at the tea stall, whereas accused

No.6 is alleged to have made available the motorcycle used by

other accused. Their release on bail does not create an automatic

right in favour of the present applicant, but it is nevertheless a

relevant circumstance while considering whether his continued

pre-trial incarceration remains necessary.


9.      More importantly, the applicant is in custody since 12th

January 2025. He has thus, undergone incarceration of nearly one

year and eight months. Investigation has long since been
                                 -6-
                                                         BA-1564-2026

completed and the charge-sheet was filed on 9th April 2025. The

prosecution proposes to examine about 40 witnesses. There is

nothing before this Court to indicate that the trial is likely to

conclude in the immediate future. Continued detention cannot

assume the character of punishment before determination of guilt,

particularly when the presence of the applicant at the trial can be

secured by appropriate conditions.


10.     The Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasised

that parity is a relevant consideration in bail matters, though it

cannot be applied as an inflexible formula and the Court must

examine the role and material attributable to each accused

independently. Tested on that principle, although the material

against the applicant is not identical to that against accused Nos.5,

6 and 7, their release on bail is a circumstance which cannot

altogether be ignored. When this circumstance is considered

cumulatively with the applicant's incarceration since January

2025, completion of investigation, absence of recovery from him,

absence of criminal antecedents and the time likely to be consumed

in conclusion of the trial, further pre-trial detention of the

applicant does not appear necessary.


11.     Needless to clarify that the observations made herein are

confined to consideration of the present bail application and are
                                    -7-
                                                          BA-1564-2026

prima facie in nature. The learned trial Judge shall decide the case

uninfluenced by any of these observations.


12.          In the circumstances, the application deserves to be

allowed. Hence, the following order:

                                  ORDER


      (i)     The Bail Application is allowed.


      (ii)    The applicant - Abdul Nabi Hanif Patel shall be released
      on bail in connection with Crime No. I-14 of 2025 registered
      with Bhusawal Bazaar Peth Police Station, District Jalgaon, on
      executing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two solvent
      sureties in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Trial
      Court.


      (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
      inducement, threat or promise to any prosecution witness and
      shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.


      (iv) The applicant shall attend the proceedings before the
      Trial Court on every date unless exempted by the Trial Court
      for sufficient cause and shall cooperate with the expeditious
      conclusion of the trial.


      (v)     The applicant shall not enter the territorial limits of
      Bhusawal City, except for attending the proceedings before the
      Trial Court or reporting to the investigating agency, for a
                                        -8-
                                                              BA-1564-2026

          period of six months from the date of his release. Before his
          release, he shall furnish to the Investigating Officer and the
          Trial Court the address at which he will reside during the said
          period and his mobile number, and shall intimate any change
          thereof.


          (vi) The applicant shall not leave India without prior
          permission of the Trial Court and shall surrender his passport,
          if any, before the Trial Court.


          (vii) Breach of any of the above conditions shall entitle the
          prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.


          (viii) The Bail Application stands disposed of accordingly.


                                              (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR)
                                                     JUDGE




Tandale