Bombay High Court
JEESHAN AHMAD ISTIYAQ AHMAD KHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicant.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Jeeshan Ahmad Istiyaq Ahmad Khan, accused in a murder case arising from a scuffle over a parking dispute on 20 December 2024. The prosecution alleged that the accused, along with two others, assaulted the deceased, with one co‑accused using an iron stool to deliver a fatal blow, while the applicant allegedly struck the informant with a metal Kada. The applicant argued that he did not use any weapon and that a co‑accused who similarly did not use a weapon had been granted bail, invoking parity. The Court, after reviewing CCTV footage, found no evidence of a pre‑planned common intention by all accused and noted that the applicant had been in custody for over 18 months. Consequently, the Court granted bail with standard conditions, emphasizing that the order does not prejudice the trial’s merits.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to bail despite being charged with murder under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sandhita, 2023.
- Whether the absence of a weapon used by the applicant and parity with a co‑accused warrant bail.
- Whether the alleged common intention among the accused precludes bail.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 — s. 135, 37(1)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- common intention
- parity
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal procedure
- BNS
- Maharashtra Police Act
Judgment
HEMANT H.C.SHIV 911.BA31.26.DOC
CHANDERSEN
SHIV
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed by
HEMANT CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CHANDERSEN SHIV
Date: 2026.08.28 BAIL APPLICATION NO.31 OF 2026
16:32:16 +0300
Jeeshan Ahmad Istiyaq Ahmad Khan …. Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …Respondent
Mr. Sudeep Pasbola, Senior Advocate with Mr. Chinmay Godse i/b
Mr. Dhananjay Mishra for the Applicant.
Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for Respondent No.1 – State.
Mr. Navin Singh for Respondent No.2.
Mr. D. R. Ghanval, PSI, Parksite police station present.
CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
DATED : 27th AUGUST, 2026
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the record.
2. The Applicant/Original Accused No.2 seeks his release on
bail in connection with Sessions Case No.346 of 2025 pending on
the file of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil and
Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai. Said case arose out of Crime
No.956 of 2024, registered with Parksite police station, Mumbai
for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 109,118(1), 115, 352,
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sandhita, 2023 (“BNS”) and sections
37(1) and 135 of Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
3. The prosecution case is that, on 20th December 2024, at
about 7.30 pm, the incident occurred over the dispute of parking
two wheeler in front of the shop of the informant, during which,
Furkan (A1), Applicant and Tariq (A3) assaulted the deceased and
his son-informant by hands. Additionally, A-1 assaulted the
informant and the deceased with an iron stool. Consequently, the
Page 1 of 4
H.C.SHIV 911.BA31.26.DOC
deceased sustained grievous injury and fell on the ground. When
he was taken to the hospital, he was dead. Accordingly, present
offence came to be registered and all the accused were arrested.
On completion of the investigation, police filed the charge-sheet.
The trial Court declined to release the Applicant on bail. Hence,
this Application.
4. Mr.Pasbola, learned Senior Advocate for the applicant
submitted that the incident occurred all of a sudden. Tariq (A-3),
who was allegedly involved in the incident, but, did not use any
weapon or object to assault, has been granted bail by this Court
vide Order dated 16th March 2026 in BA/2562/2025. The
Applicant has also not used any weapon or object to assault the
other side. Thus, the role of the applicant is similar to the role of
A-3. Therefore, on the ground of parity, the Applicant deserves to
be released on bail.
5. In reply, Ms.Shinde, learned APP for Respondent No.1-State
and Mr.Singh, learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 submitted
that all the accused persons in furtherance of their common
intention assaulted the deceased and his son. Therefore, even if no
weapon is used by the applicant, he cannot escape the charge of
the murder. As such, bail be refused.
6. I have considered these submissions in the light of the
material on record and also viewed the CCTV footage which is
available in the mobile phone of PSI Ghanvat. The said CCTV
footage is not disputed by the parties. Said material clearly
indicate that the incident occurred all of sudden. Certain members
from both sides including the deceased were involved in the scuffle
and they assaulted each other by hand. While said fight was going
on, A-1 suddenly lifted an iron stool lyin gon the floor and gave a
Page 2 of 4
H.C.SHIV 911.BA31.26.DOC
forceful blow over the head of the deceased. As a result, the
deceased suffered grievous injury and he fell on the ground.
Thereafter, he did not move. However, based on that material
prima facie it cannot be said that A1 had assaulted the deceased in
furtherance of the common intention of all the accused or that the
said assault was pre-planned. No doubt, the Informant alleged
that the Applicant had assaulted him with a metal Kada. However,
the injuries sustained by the Informant are minor.
7. In the wake of above and having regard to the fact that the
applicant is in incarceration for more than 18 months, he is
entitled to be released on bail. Hence, following Order :-
(i) The Applicant – Jeeshan Ahmad Istiyaq Ahmad Khan
be released on bail in aforesaid Sessions Case No.346 of
2025 arising out of Fir No.956 of 2024, registered with
Parksite police station, Mumbai, on his executing 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 Parksite
Police Station on the 1st day of each calendar month between
12:00 noon to 4:00 p.m., till the conclusion of the trial. Said
attendance should start from 1st September, 2026.
(iii) The Applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings
before the jurisdictional Court unless exempted.
(iv) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon
the prosecution witness to prevent them from deposing
against him.
Page 3 of 4
H.C.SHIV 911.BA31.26.DOC
(v) On being released from jail, the Applicant shall
furnish his contact number and residential address to the
Investigation Officer and shall keep him updated, in case
there is any change.
(vi) The Applicant shall not indulge in identical activities
for which he has been arraigned in this case.
(vii) The Applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of
Parksite Police Station, Mumbai till conclusion of trial
except to mark his attendance in the said Police Station.
(viii) It is clarified that any observation made in the present
order are for the purpose of deciding the present Bail
Application and should not influence the out come of the
trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on
the merits of the case.
8. Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…