1 20-Cr.ABA-811-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [A.B.A.] NO. 811 OF 2026 Shabbar Khan s/o Rauf Khan -- VERSUS -- State of Maharashtra __________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. Mr. P.M. Khan, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. U.R. Phasate, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 17, 2026. Heard. 2. Apprehending arrest, the applicant has approached this Court in connection with Crime No.417/2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered with Police Station Pusad (Rural), District Yavatmal. 3. The informant, a police personnel attached to the Local Crime Branch, Yavatmal, received secret information on 22.06.2026, while on patrolling duty, that an individual was standing suspiciously near a tamarind tree near Kali Daou region, in possession of a double-barreled firearm. Acting upon the said information, the police team, along with panch witnesses, conducted a raid and apprehended the accused, namely, Syed Kalim alias Kalya Syed Hafiz. Upon his Piyush Mahajan 2026:BHC-NAG:12387 2 20-Cr.ABA-811-2026 interrogation and personal search, a country-made double- barreled firearm valued at Rs.50,000/-, was allegedly recovered from him. The accused was not found to possess any valid licence or permit authorising possession of the said firearm. During the preliminary inquiry, the apprehended accused allegedly disclosed that the said firearm belonged to the present applicant and was intended to be used for hunting purposes. The firearm was accordingly seized under a duly drawn Panchanama. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the First Information Report came to be registered on 22/06/2026 against the accused persons. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that, pursuant to receipt of secret information that the co-accused was in possession of a double-barreled firearm, the police apprehended him and seized the said firearm from his possession. He further submits that, during the course of inquiry, the co-accused disclosed the name of the present applicant, alleging that the said firearm belonged to the applicant. He submits that, apart from the said disclosure, there is no material connecting the present applicant with the co-accused or with the seized firearm. Under such circumstances, the learned counsel submits that the applicant deserves to be granted anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. vehemently opposes the application and submits that the applicant has Piyush Mahajan 3 20-Cr.ABA-811-2026 criminal antecedents. He further submits that the firearm appears to have been used recently, as can be gathered from the results of its analysis. He further submits that, though at present there is no direct material establishing a link between the applicant and the co-accused, the fact remains that the co- accused has disclosed the name of the present applicant. He submits that the investigation is still in progress and, under such circumstances, it would not be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant., 6. I have considered the submissions advanced by both sides. It appears that, in the year 2017, one crime was registered against the applicant vide F.I.R. No. 409/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 9, 39, 44, 48 and 51 of the Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. Another offence was registered vide F.I.R. No. 170/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 325, 294, 323, 452, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, wherein, the applicant was acquitted. So far as the present case is concerned, it appears that the co-accused has disclosed the name of the present applicant, stating that the firearm belongs to him. Apart from the said disclosure, a perusal of the case diary does not indicate that any material has been found connecting the present applicant with the said co-accused or with the seized firearm, though the investigation has been substantially completed. Under such circumstances, merely Piyush Mahajan 4 20-Cr.ABA-811-2026 because one crime of the year 2017 is pending against the applicant, that circumstance, by itself, would not be sufficient to deny the applicant the relief of anticipatory bail. Hence, the following order: O R D E R (i) The Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of; (ii) In the event of arrest of applicant (Shabbar Khan s/o Rauf Khan) in connection with Crime No.417/2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 25 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered with Police Station Pusad (Rural), District Yavatmal, be released on bail on furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount; (iii) Pending Misc. Application(s), if any, also stand disposed of; (M.M. NERLIKAR, J.) Piyush Mahajan Signed by: Piyush Ramesh Mahajan Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 17/09/2026 17:39:30