IN THE COURT OF SESSION JUDGE, THANE,

AT – THANE

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPL. NO. ………./2013

IN
Cr. No. I-69/2013 OF WADA POLICE
STATION (L.C.B.) FOR OFFENCE U/s. 395,
342, 413, 412 OF IPC.

1) Abdul Azim Moh. Yusuf @ Nirahu Khan

Age – 26 years, Occ. – Business,
2) Riyaz Ahmad Chaudhari
Age – 25 years, Occ. – Business,
Both R/At. – Santosh Bhuvan,
Aman Market, Nalasopara (E),
Tal. Bhiwandi, Dist. Thane. .... APPLICANTS

V/S

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

(Through Wada Police Station) ..... OPPONENT

1
 AN APPLICATION OF THE
APPLICANTS FOR SEEKING
DIRECTIONS U/S. 438 OF Cr.P.C.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR,

1. That the Applicants above named are permanent

residence at given their address, were there residing with
their family members consisting of parents and other
relatives.
2. The applicant no. 1 & 2 are carrying their own
business of scrap it their local area.

3. The applicant belong to the respectful family. They

have clean past, there are no antecedent to there discredit
like pendency of any criminal cause or previous
conviction.

4. By virtue of being as above the applicants

commands good reputation and image in the society at
large and in the community to which they belong.

5. The police attached to Wada Police Station

(L.C.B.) have been calling the applicants at the police
station of the purpose of interrogation in the above
criminal since 20/11/2013 and threatening their arrest.

6. The Prosecution story briefly stated is as under :-

a) The complainant Mr. Ramesh Devilal Kothari is
the owner of the Shree Laxmi Metal Industries,
Tal. Wada, Dist. Thane, Village Chandivali. In that

2
 company fosfuras copar muster product was made
their, but raw material was calling for out of
village or out of state.

b) On 05/12/12 when I was sleep Udaypur, Rajsthan

one worker calling me on 5.00 am and told me the
10 to 15 unknown persons their age of 25-30 they
muffling their face in different hanky they was
coming midnight to 2.00 pm. they have with Lathi,
Mardanda, Iran rod. Enter over company nad
abusing me and all workers as well as they assault
to watchmen of company and lock the office. The
our company they carry away copar crap and
fosfuras copar. When I was listen this incident next
day I am coming to my company when I saw the
incident the 8 Lack rupees copar crap was theft. I
was inquired near about company and businessmen
and lastly I was filed the complaint in Wada Police
Station against the unknown persons it is the
prosecution story.

7. Under these circumstances the applicant

reasonably apprehended their arrest, most respectfully
preferred this application U/s. 438 on the following
grounds :-

GROUNDS
i) The applicants are innocent have committed no
crime as alleged by the complaint and they have
been falsely implicated in the crime and suspicious
and ulterior motive.

ii) The offence against alleged applicant is not

punishable with death nor wit life imprisonment,

3
 hence bar put by sec. 437 Cr.P.C. will not come in
their way for considering prayer for bail.

iii) It is pertaining to note that, the offence was

registered against the unknown person a
complainant is not eye witness of this C.R.

iv) It is alleged that, the incident occur on 05/11/2013

at midnight 2 am. the lot of workers present in this
company but their they didn’t call anybody on 2.00
pm. to 5.00 pm. it is suspect about those people.

v) It is pertaining to note that, When worker calling

the complainant on 5.00 am. and complainant
coming there same day but their complainant
didn’t lodged the complaint immediately. He go
firstly his house and that after lodged the
complaint against the unknown persons.

vi) The prosecution doesn’t explain the delay of

lodging the F.I.R.

vii) It is alleged that, the co-accused were arrested on

29/03/2013 and 30/03/2013. the all co-accused
remanded the police custody on 04/04/2013 in
their police custody. Their forfuras copars of 94
plates was recover the hand of co-accused.

viii) It is pertaining to note that, the co-accused were

not single ward talk to police in our name they
didn’t disclose our name, so how can police give
our name.

4
 ix) It is alleged that, we didn’t know the incidents spot
we didn’t conquered about incident (decoity).

x) The applicants undertake to abide with the terms

they may be impose by this Hon’ble Court and
further to co-operate with the police for the
purpose of interrogation.

xi) In the event of arrest the applicant are likely to lose

the reputation and image in the eyes of society.

8. This is the first bail application, the application

have not preferred any other application of this kind
either in this Hon’ble Court or in Hon’ble High Court of
Mumbai.

9. That The Applicant therefore most respectfully prays –

a) That the application be admitted.

b) The your honour may be pleased to direct the

officer incharge of investigation in Cr. No. I-
69/2013 of Wada Police Station (N.C.B.) for
offence U/s. 395, 342, 413, 412 of I.P.C. to enlarge
the applicant on bail in the event of arrest in the
same or such term, your honour may deem fit.

c) An interim anticipatory bail may please be granted

in terms of prayer (b) above.

5
 AND FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS FAVOUR THE
APPLICATION AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

Filed in Court 1)
On : 28/11/2013

2)

Applicants

Advocate for Applicants

IN THE COURT OF SESSION JUDGE, THANE,

6
 AT – THANE

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPL. NO. ………./2013

IN
Cr. No. I-69/2013 OF WADA POLICE
STATION (L.C.B.) FOR OFFENCE U/s. 395,
342, 413, 412 OF IPC.

1) Abdul Azim Moh. Yusuf @ Nirahu Khan

Age – 26 years, Occ. – Business,
2) Riyaz Ahmad Chaudhari
Age – 25 years, Occ. – Business,
Both R/At. – Santosh Bhuvan,
Aman Market, Nalasopara (E),
Tal. Bhiwandi, Dist. Thane. ...... APPLICANTS

V/S

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

(Through Wada Police Station) ..... OPPONENT

AN APPLICATION OF THE
APPLICANT FOR INTERIM
ANTICIPATORY BAIL.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR,

1) That the applicant has preferred an application U/s. 438

OF Cr.P.C. today, in this Hon’ble Court for seeking
direction.

2) That the application of the applicant is based on legal

grounds of merits and that they hope to succeed in the
same on merits. However, pending hearing and final
disposal of this application may take about two weeks

7
 time. If the applicant are arrested, during the pendency,
The various propose of filling an application for
anticipatory bail will be frustrated.

3) That in the circumstances, it is just necessary and in the

interest of justice to grant interim anticipatory bail in
favour of the applicants, during pendency.

4) That the applicant adopt the contents and grounds stated

in the application U/s 438 of Cr.P.C. for the purpose of
this application.

5) That an affidavit of applicant in support of this

application is filed herewith.

6) That it is therefore prayed that, your honour may be

pleased to grant interim anticipatory bail in favour of the
applicant in term of prayer (B) of main application U/s.
438 of Cr. P.C.

AND FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS FAVOUR THE

APPLICATION AS IN DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY.

Filed in Court
On : 28/11/2013 1)

2)
Applicant

Advocate for Applicant

IN THE COURT OF SESSION JUDGE, THANE,
AT – THANE

8
 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPL. NO. ………./2013
IN
Cr. No. I-69/2013 OF WADA POLICE
STATION (L.C.B.) FOR OFFENCE U/s. 395,
342, 413, 412 OF IPC.

1) Abdul Azim Moh. Yusuf @ Nirahu Khan

Age – 26 years, Occ. – Business,
2) Riyaz Ahmad Chaudhari
Age – 25 years, Occ. – Business,
Both R/At. – Santosh Bhuvan,
Aman Market, Nalasopara (E),
Tal. Bhiwandi, Dist. Thane. ..... APPLICANTS

V/S

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

(Through Wada Police Station) ..... OPPONENT

AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE
APPLICANT NO. 1.

AFFIDAVIT
I Abdul Azim Moh. Yusuf @ Nirahu Khan, Age – 26
years, Occ. – Business, Both R/At. – Santosh Bhuvan, Aman
Market, Nalasopara (E), Tal. Bhiwandi, Dist. Thane, do here by
state on solemn affirmation as under;
1) I state that, we have preferred an application for seeking
directions U/s. 438 of Cr.P.C in this Hon’ble Court today
alongwith an application for interim anticipatory bail, the
contents where of are true and correct.
2) I state that, we have not concern about that offence.

9
3) I state that, we didn’t have knowledge about concerned
C.R.

4) I state that, we didn’t have theft an above stated material.

5) I state that, we undertake to co-operate with the police for

the purpose of the interrogation and further abide with
the terms.

6) I state that, our reputation and image in the society and

community will be seriously damage in the event of our
arrest.

7) I state that, the police literally calling we since

20/11/2013.

8) Whatever stated above in this affidavit in paras no. 1 to 7

are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, belief
and information.

Solemnly affirm at Thane this 28th day of November,

2013.

Identified, read over &

explained in marathi by me.

Deponent / Applicant

Advocate

VERIFICATION

10
 I Abdul Azim Moh. Yusuf @ Nirahu Khan, Age – 26
years, the applicant abovenamed, do here by state on solemn
affirmation that whatever stated above in this affidavit is true
and correct to the best of my knowledge, belief and
information.

Filed in the Court

On : 28/11/2013 Deponent / Applicant no. 1

Advocate for the applicants.

11