Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Accused in Murder Case Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence. Indictment Based on Confessional Statement of Co-Accused and Weak Circumstantial Evidence Insufficient to Deny Bail Under Section 439 CrPC.

High Court: Bombay High Court In Favour of Accused
  • 1343
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Bombay High Court heard a bail application under Section 439 CrPC filed by Rafique Salim Hashmi, who was arrested in connection with CR No.126 of 2023 registered at Nerul Police Station for offences under Sections 302, 120B, 34 IPC, Sections 3, 5, 25, 27 Arms Act, and Sections 37(1), 135 Maharashtra Police Act. The case involved the murder of Savajibhai Manjeri on 15.03.2023, allegedly orchestrated by his cousin Haribhai (absconding) who hired accused No.1 Mahek to eliminate the deceased. The applicant was a welder by profession and was indicted based on the confessional statement of accused No.1 that the applicant erased the engine and chassis number of the motorcycle used in the crime. The prosecution also relied on CCTV footage showing the applicant with accused No.1 three days before the crime, CDR records showing calls between accused, and the applicant's alleged booking of a taxi for other accused on the day of the crime. The court observed that the applicant's indictment was solely based on the confessional statement of accused No.1 recorded on 06.04.2023, 21 days after the crime. The circumstantial evidence, including CCTV footage and CDR, did not establish a prima facie chain linking the applicant to the murder, especially since the applicant was not in contact with other accused on the day of the crime. The court distinguished the case of Ishwarji Nagaji Mali v. State of Gujarat, noting different facts. The court held that the chain of circumstances was not established prima facie and granted bail subject to conditions: a bond of Rs.25,000/- with sureties, monthly reporting to Nerul Police Station until framing of charges, prohibition from entering Nerul Police Station jurisdiction except for reporting, cooperation with trial, not leaving Maharashtra without permission, and deposit of passport within two weeks.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Bail - Section 439 CrPC - Prima Facie Case - The court considered whether the applicant, indicted solely on the confessional statement of co-accused and weak circumstantial evidence, should be granted bail. Held that the chain of circumstances was not established prima facie, and the confessional statement recorded 21 days after the crime was insufficient to deny bail. (Paras 7-14)

B) Evidence - Confessional Statement of Co-Accused - Evidentiary Value - The court noted that the applicant's indictment was entirely based on the confessional statement of accused No.1 recorded on 06.04.2023, which was almost 21 days after the commission of the crime. Held that such a statement, without corroborative material, cannot be the sole basis for denying bail. (Paras 7, 14)

C) Criminal Procedure - Circumstantial Evidence - Prima Facie Chain - The court examined the circumstantial evidence including CCTV footage and CDR records. Held that the evidence did not establish a prima facie chain of circumstances linking the applicant to the crime, as the applicant was not in contact with other accused on the day of the crime. (Paras 8-10)

D) Criminal Procedure - Bail - Conditions - The court granted bail with conditions including a bond of Rs.25,000/-, monthly reporting to police station, prohibition from entering Nerul Police Station jurisdiction except for reporting, cooperation with trial, not leaving Maharashtra without permission, and deposit of passport. (Para 15)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC when the indictment is based solely on the confessional statement of a co-accused and weak circumstantial evidence, without establishing a prima facie chain of circumstances linking him to the crime.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the bail application and ordered the release of the applicant on bail with conditions: bond of Rs.25,000/- with sureties, monthly reporting to Nerul Police Station until framing of charges, prohibition from entering Nerul Police Station jurisdiction except for reporting, cooperation with trial, not leaving Maharashtra without permission, and deposit of passport within two weeks.

Law Points

  • Bail
  • Prima Facie Case
  • Circumstantial Evidence
  • Confessional Statement of Co-Accused
  • Section 439 CrPC
  • Section 302 IPC
  • Section 120B IPC
  • Section 34 IPC
  • Arms Act
  • Maharashtra Police Act
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2024 LawText (BOM) (7) 51

CR No.126 of 2023

2024-07-05

MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

Mr. Upadhyay (for Applicant), Mr. Dabke (for Respondent-State)

Rafique Salim Hashmi

State of Maharashtra

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Bail application under Section 439 CrPC in a murder case.

Remedy Sought

Applicant sought bail in connection with CR No.126 of 2023 for offences under IPC, Arms Act, and Maharashtra Police Act.

Filing Reason

Applicant was arrested based on confessional statement of co-accused and circumstantial evidence, but the court found insufficient prima facie link to the crime.

Issues

Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC when the indictment is based solely on the confessional statement of a co-accused and weak circumstantial evidence. Whether the chain of circumstances established prima facie links the applicant to the crime.

Submissions/Arguments

Prosecution argued that CCTV footage, CDR records, and the applicant's role in erasing motorcycle numbers and booking a taxi for other accused establish his involvement. Applicant's counsel argued that the indictment is solely based on the confessional statement of accused No.1, and the circumstantial evidence does not establish a prima facie case.

Ratio Decidendi

The chain of circumstances must be established prima facie to deny bail; a confessional statement of a co-accused recorded 21 days after the crime, without corroborative material, is insufficient to link the applicant to the crime. Weak circumstantial evidence such as CCTV footage and CDR records, without direct involvement, does not justify denial of bail.

Judgment Excerpts

Indictment of Applicant is solely on the basis of the statement of accused No.1 that he was instrumental in erasing the engine number and chassis number of the motorcycle which was used in the commission of crime. The chain of circumstances having not been established prima facie, I am of the clear opinion that Applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail since his indictment is entirely on the basis of confessional statement of accused No.1 which was recorded on 06.04.2023 which is almost 21 days after the commission of the crime.

Procedural History

The bail application was filed under Section 439 CrPC before the Bombay High Court. The court heard arguments from both sides and passed the order granting bail.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 439
  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 302, 120B, 34
  • Arms Act, 1959: 3, 5, 25, 27
  • Maharashtra Police Act, 1951: 37(1), 135
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Appeal for Specific Performance in Land Sale Contract; Time Not of Essence When Vendor's Title Incomplete and Sanction Required. Purchaser's Readiness and Willingness Established by Conduct, and Acceptance of Refund Decree Does ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Hears Petition to Set Aside Arbitral Award in Redevelopment Dispute; Developer Challenges Directions to Amend Building Plans and Pay Compensation. Court's Decision Awaited.