Bombay High Court

MOHAMMAD ASLAM MOHAMMAD NISFULLAH ANSARIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 1 October 2026
Disposal: Allowed

Holding

The court held that the prolonged incarceration without reasonable trial progress violated the accused’s right to a speedy trial, and therefore granted bail subject to conditions.

Summary

The applicant, Mohammad Aslam Mohammad Nisfullah Ansari, was charged with murder, kidnapping and assault under Sections 302, 364 and 342 of the IPC for an incident that occurred on 16 July 2018. He has been in custody for over eight years, with the charge framed only in 2024 and merely three witnesses examined, while the prosecution lists thirty witnesses. The applicant argued that this delay infringes his constitutional right to a speedy trial under Article 21 and sought bail. The court acknowledged a prima facie case but found that the prolonged detention without substantial trial progress violated the right to speedy trial and that the accused was not responsible for the delay. Consequently, the court granted bail with strict conditions, emphasizing that the trial must continue without prejudice from the bail order.

Issues considered

Whether the accused's right to a speedy trial under Article 21 has been violated warranting bail.
Whether the existence of a prima facie case under Sections 302, 364, 342 IPC precludes the grant of bail.
Whether the prosecution's delay in trial proceedings justifies the release of the accused on bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 342, 364

Subjects

bail
right to speedy trial
Article 21
IPC
murder
prolonged detention
criminal procedure

Judgment

P.H. JAYANI 918 BA2722.2025.DOC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2722 OF 2025

Mohammad Aslam Mohammad Nisfullah …. Applicant
Ansari
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent

Mr. Ravishankar Dwivedi a/w. Mr. Satish Shukla, Ms. Aishwarya
Pandit, Ms. Sakshi Singh and Mr. Sainath Baji for the Applicant.
Mr. R.M. Pethe, APP for the Respondent – State.
Mr. Salve, PSI, Hill Line Police Station, present.

CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
DATED : 1st OCTOBER, 2026
P.C. :-

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the record.

2. The applicant seeks his release on bail in Sessions Case
No.190/2020 pending before the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Kalyan, Dist. Thane arising out of Cr.No.178/2018
registered with Hill Line Police Station, Ulhasnagar, Dist. Thane
for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 364, 342 of the
Indian Penal Code on the report dated 17.07.2018 filed by Mr.
Ganesh Subhash Alhat.

3. The prosecution case is that on 16.07.2018, between 20:30
to 21:00 hours, the applicant embraced Ms. ‘A’ who was then aged
19 years. The said act was seen by the deceased – Harsh, aged 11
years. Therefore, the applicant committed murder of the deceased
apprehending that he may disclose his said act to others.
Therefore, the aforesaid crime came to be registered, applicant

Page 1 of 3
P.H. JAYANI 918 BA2722.2025.DOC

was arrested and charge-sheet was filed. The trial court refused to
release the applicant on bail. Thereafter, the applicant filed
BA/395/2020 before this court. Said application was also rejected
vide Order dated 11.02.2021. The applicant again approached the
trial Court for bail, but, his said prayer got rejected.

4. Mr. Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the applicant submitted
that the applicant is in jail since his arrest. The charge has been
framed in the year 2024. Till the date, only three witnesses are
examined. This is denial of the applicant’s right to speedy trial
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Therefore, he urged to grant bail.

5. Considering the material on record, there is a prima facie
case against the applicant. However, Mr. Pethe, the learned APP,
on the other hand, tried his best to justify the progress of the trial
and contended that, it has not violated the right to speedy trial of
the applicant. Thus, he has opposed the application.

6. Admittedly, the applicant is in jail since last eight years and
two months. The charge has been framed in the year 2024. Till the
date, only three witnesses are examined. This indicates that the
trial is progressing slowly. Nothing is pointed out from the record
indicating that the applicant has been blameable for delay in the
trial. Thus, the detention of the applicant without reasonable
advancement of the trial has been denying him the right of speedy
trial. The prosecution has cited 30 witnesses. Therefore, the trial is
not likely to conclude in the near future. The detention of the
applicant must be causing him hardship and making it punitive.

7. In view thereof, the applicant is entitled for bail on the
ground of prolonged incarceration. Hence, following order :-

Page 2 of 3
P.H. JAYANI 918 BA2722.2025.DOC

(i) The applicant – Mohammad Aslam Mohammad
Nisfullah Ansari be released on bail in the aforesaid
Sessions Case No.190/2020 pending before the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan, Dist. Thane, arising out
of Cr.No.178/2018 registered with Hill Line Police Station,
Dist. Thane, on his executing a P.R. Bond in the sum of
Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The applicant shall mark his attendance at Hill Line
Police Station, Ulhasnagar, Dist. Thane on 1 st and 16th day of
a month, between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., till conclusion of
the trial.

(iii) The applicant shall not leave Thane District till
conclusion of the trial.

(iv) The applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings
before the jurisdictional Court.

(v) On being released from jail, the applicant shall
furnish his contact number and residential address to the
Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated in case
there is any change.

(vi) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence the
prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing
against him.

(vii) It is clarified that any observation made in the present
Order are for the purpose of deciding the present Bail
Application. The trial Court shall decide the said case
without getting influenced by any of the said observations.

8. Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

Digitally
signed by (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)
PREETI
PREETI HEERO
HEERO JAYANI
JAYANI Date:
2026.10.03
17:26:18
+0530 Page 3 of 3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…