Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2024 DAILYLAW 1715 (BOM)

SHAHBAJ FARUKH PATEL AND ORS v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

APEAL/312/2024 · 2026-07-22

Shri N R Borkar

Criminal Appealbody2024

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 1-APEAL 312-24.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.312 OF 2024 Shahbaj Farukh Patel & Ors. … Appellants Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents ----- Mr. Tapan Thatte a/w Vivek Arote & Akshay Dingale & Harish Garde for the Appellants. Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Manisha Devkar, appointed advocate a/w Anjali Kondvilkar for Respondent No.2. ----- CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 22ND JULY 2026 P.C. : 1. This Appeal takes exception to the order dated 27th June 2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel below Exhibits 45, 46, 47, 49 and 50 in Special (Atrocity) Case No.15 of 2022. 2. In the aforesaid Special Case, the present Appellants are facing trial for the offences punishable under Sections 417, 376(2)(n), 377, 384, 313, 323, 504, 506(2), 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r), (s), (w)(i), (w)(ii), (u) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 3, 25 of the Arms Act. 3. By the impugned order, the Learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the applications filed by the Appellants for discharge. Mugdha 1 of 2 2 1-APEAL 312-24.doc 4. Learned Counsel for the Appellants, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw the present Appeal qua Appellant No.1. 5. As regards Appellant Nos.2 to 6, the trial court has rejected their application/s without examining whether on the basis of allegations against them, the offences alleged against them are made out or not. The order impugned therefore rejecting the application/s of Appellant Nos.2 to 6 cannot be allowed to stand and the matter will have to be remanded back to the trial court to decide their application/s afresh. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. The impugned order to the extent of rejecting the application/s filed by Appellant Nos.2 to 6 for discharge is set aside. ii. The trial court shall decide their application/s afresh. iii. The Appeal qua Appellant No.1 is dismissed as withdrawn. 6. The Criminal Appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (N.R. BORKAR, J.) Mugdha 2 of 2