1 36 BA 1068.26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO. 1068/2026 (Qazi Mohammad Salequin Qazi Abdul Salim Vs. The State of Maharashtra) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. R.M. Daga, Advocate for applicant. Mr. A. Kadukar APP for non-applicant/State. CORAM: M. M. NERLIKAR, J . DATED : 25/08/2026. Heard. 2. By this application, the applicant is seeking bail in connection with Crime No. 244/2026 registered with Police Station Nagpuri Gate, Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 118(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the informant’s brother Mohammad Maqsood Mohammad Lukman asked his other siblings for allowing him to cultivate on one acre of land belonging to their father, which was agreed by the informant, however opposed by brother Abdul Taskeen Mohammad Lukman and Mohammad Nahid Mohammad Lukman and sister Shahida 2 36 BA 1068.26 Parveen Abdul Saleem. On 01/05/2026 informant and Mohammad Maqsood went to the house of Abdul Taskeen to convince him about giving the land for cultivation. At that time along with Abdul Taskeen, Mohammad Nahid and nephew Salequin Abdul Saleem were present. However, a fight broke out amongst them. At that time, Mohammad Nahid and Salequin caught hold of Mohammad Maqsood and said to beat him. At that time, suddenly Abdul Taskeen took out a knife from his pocket and stabbed him on the left side of his chest. Informant went to rescue him but he was also assaulted by knife on the right eyebrow. Thereafter, the informant and his injured brother went to the hospital and his brother was declared dead. Based on this information, the first information report was registered. 4. The deceased, accused Nos. 1 and 2 are real brothers. There was a dispute between the deceased on one hand and accused Nos. 1 Abdul Tasekeen Mohd. Lukman and accused No.2- Mohd. Nahid Mohd. Lukman on the other hand. The deceased, accused Nos. 1 and 2 are maternal uncles of the applicant. He submitted that on 01/05/2026, deceased and informant visited the house 3 36 BA 1068.26 of accused No.1 and they demanded the land for cultivation, leading to a quarrel between deceased and accused No.1. At the relevant time, accused No.2 and the present applicant were also present at the spot. The said quarrel culminated into a fight between the brothers. It is alleged that the applicant and accused No. 2 instigated the main accused i.e. accused No.1. by stating “beat him”, and the applicant accordingly caught hold of the hand of the deceased and accused No.1 gave blow on the deceased with the help of knife. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that there was no intention on the part of the applicant to instigate accused No.1 to commit murder of the deceased. The limited role which was played by the applicant was only to the extent of holding the hand. Considering the nature of allegations and the relations, it could be gathered that the applicant was not having any motive to kill the deceased and he only participated by giving support to accused Nos. 1 and 2. Considering the limited role played by the applicant, he deserves to be granted bail. 4 36 BA 1068.26 5. On the other hand, the learned APP vehemently opposes the application and submits that it is the applicant who has held the hands of the deceased due to which the accused No. 1 was successful in giving the blow on the deceased. The applicant has not only held the hands but also instigated by stating that accused No.1 should beat the deceased. The cause of death is stab injury over chest and therefore he submits that considering the statement of eye witnesses and postmortem report, the applicant does not deserve to be granted bail, since there is direct material against the applicant. 6. I have considered the rival subissions. The relationship is not in dispute that the deceased and accused Nos. 1 and 2 are maternal uncles of the applicant. It further appears that on 01/05/2026 when the deceased along with the informant went to the house of the accused No.1 for demanding land for cultivation, at that time, a quarrel took place. During which, the applicant caught hold of the hand of the deceased and thereafter accused No.1. inflicted blow with the help of knife on the deceased. Though the allegations are serious in nature, however considering the role of the applicant i.e. only to the limited 5 36 BA 1068.26 extent of holding the hand of deceased and instigating the accused No.1 to beat the deceased. Considering the nature of allegations and the fact that now the investigation is over, chargesheet is filed and limited role was played by the applicant, I am inclined to grant bail, hence the following order:- ORDER (i) Criminal application is allowed and disposed of. (ii) The applicant/accused Qazi Mohammad Salequin Qazi Abdul Salim be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 244/2026 registered with Police Station Nagpuri Gate, Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 118(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount. (iii) The accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the evidence. (iv) The accused shall provide his residential address and cell number to concerned Police Station and shall not change his place of residence without prior intimation to the concerned Investigating Officer. (v) The applicant/accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial for two 6 36 BA 1068.26 consecutive dates or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail. 7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. 8. The observations of this Court are prima facie in nature and are only limited to this application. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by the aforesaid observations. ( M. M. NERLIKAR , J.) Gohane Signed by: Mr. J. B. Gohane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 27/08/2026 16:49:57