H.C.SHIV 913.BA2607.26.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2607 OF 2026 Farheen Mohammed Abid Mallik …. Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra …Respondent Ms. Anjali Awasthi, Advocate through VC with Mr. Afsar Ansari and Aamir Khan for the Applicant. Ms. K. T. Hiwrale, APP for the Respondent – State. Mr. Sharad Shankar Kumbhar, PI, Mumbra police station present. CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. DATED : 27th AUGUST, 2026 P.C. :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The Applicant seeks her release on bail in connection with C.R. No.I-235 of 2026, registered with Mumbra police station, Thane for offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”) on the report of wife of the deceased-informant. 3. The prosecution case is that, Accused No.1/A-1 is husband of the applicant. Informant is the wife of deceased-Raju Yadav, who was working as a Supervisor/Security Guard in the buildings named ‘Anaya and Star City’. The deceased used to collect maintenance amounts from the occupants of the buildings, provide flats there on rental basis, prepare rent agreements etc. A1 and the applicant used to reside on rent in a flat in Star City, A- Wing. Therefore, both the accused and the deceased were acquainted with each other. It is alleged that, meanwhile, illicit HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Digitally signed by HEMANT CHANDERSEN SHIV Date: 2026.08.28 13:57:17 +0530 H.C.SHIV 913.BA2607.26.DOC relationship developed between the applicant and the deceased. When A1 came to know about the same, he had expressed his anger about the deceased before certain witnesses and told them that he will take a revenge. It is alleged that, A1 then threatened the applicant to help to kill the deceased otherwise he will divorce her. Therefore, on 16th February, 2026 at about 10.30 pm, the applicant called the deceased on 3rd floor of the building on the say of A1 and caused him to consume cold drink mixed with stupefying substance. Consequently, the deceased lost his conscious and then, A1 assaulted him by means of knife. Therefore, aforesaid crime came to be registered and both the accused were arrested. The trial Court declined to release the applicant on bail. 4. Ms.Awasthi, learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that except allegation of purchasing cold-drinks from a nearby shop through a known watchman of the society, there is no evidence against the applicant showing that just before the murder she had called the deceased at the spot on the say of A1 and thus, abetted in the murder. As such, the applicant is innocent and deserves to be released on bail. 5. In reply, Ms.Hiwrale, learned APP submitted that without help of the applicant it was not possible for A1 to call the deceased at the spot. The material on record show that just before the murder, quarrel was going on between A1 and the deceased. The applicant and A1 were calling the witness Mohd. Firoz Tahir Hussain Shaikh on the 3rd floor as quarrel was going on between A1 and the deceased. Till commission of the murder, the applicant was present at the spot. Therefore, there is a prima facie case against the applicant and she is not entitled for bail. Page 2 of 5 H.C.SHIV 913.BA2607.26.DOC 6. I have considered the submissions. Although it is alleged that, the applicant had called the deceased at the spot, no material is pointed to that effect from the record. On the contrary, in the FIR it is narrated that the deceased had left his room on 16.02.2026, at about 10.30 pm, telling the informant that he was going to play DJ at Thane. 6.1 No doubt, the statement of the Kamal Vishwakarma – watchman of the society indicates that, at about 10.00 pm, the applicant had told him to get cold drink and he purchased the cold drink from a nearby shop and gave it to the applicant. From the statement of witness Mohd. Firoz Tahir Hussain Shaikh it appears that between 10 pm to 11.00 pm A1 and the deceased were present on the 3rd floor and they were boozing. The applicant was present there. Meanwhile, A1 went to the room of the witness Mohd. Firoz Tahir Hussain Shaikh and called him on 3rd floor. But, said witness did not go there. Then, the applicant called the witness on the 3rd floor. At that time, the witness went there and saw that A1 and the deceased were quarreling with each-other. Therefore, he came down and suggested the applicant to go to her room. Thereafter, the deceased was found murdered on 17.02.2026, in the noon time. However, there is no evidence showing that there was illicit relationship between the applicant and the deceased. On the basis of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, prima facie it cannot be concluded that the applicant had abetted for the murder or she participated in the murder. Ms.Awasthi, the learned Counsel submits that the applicant is 8 months pregnant and she is in need H.C.SHIV 913.BA2607.26.DOC of medical and home care. The applicant has three children. The applicant is not likely to abscond and tamper with prosecution evidence. 7. In view thereof, the Applicant is entitled for bail. Hence, following Order :- (i) The Applicant – Farheen Mohammed Abid Mallik be released on bail in aforesaid FIR C.R. No.I-235 of 2026 registered with Mumbra police station, Thane, on her executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. (ii) The Applicant shall mark her attendance at Mumbra police station, Thane on 1st day of calender month, once in three months between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial, starting from 1st December 2026. (iii) The Applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court. (iv) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon the prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing against her. (v) On being released from jail, the Applicant shall furnish her contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change. (vi) It is clarified that any observation made in the present order are for the purpose of deciding the present Bail H.C.SHIV 913.BA2607.26.DOC Application and should not influence the outcome of the trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. 8. At this stage, as requested by Ms.Awasthi, learned Advocate, the Applicant is granted four weeks time to furnish the surety. Till then, the applicant be released on bail on her executing a P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and depositing a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- in lieu of furnishing the surety. On furnishing such surety/ies, the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited by the Applicant shall be returned. 9. Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)