Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Afroz Khan Shahid Khan Pathan in UAPA Case, Citing Lack of Substantive Evidence

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Bombay High Court, in a judgment pronounced on June 22, 2023, has granted bail to Afroz Khan Shahid Khan Pathan, who was convicted under various sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The court, comprising Hon'ble Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Hon'ble Justice Gauri Godse, suspended the applicant's sentence and ordered his release on bail, citing a lack of substantive evidence to support the allegations.

Afroz Khan Shahid Khan Pathan, a 41-year-old pharmacist residing in Majalgoan, District Beed, Maharashtra, had appealed against his conviction. The court heard the arguments from both the applicant's counsel, Mr. Mubin Solkar with Mr. Tahir Hussain, and the prosecution, represented by Mr. Raja Thakare, Senior Advocate, along with Ms. S. S. Kaushik, Assistant Public Prosecutor, and Mr. Siddharth Jagushte.

The judgment highlighted that the prosecution heavily relied on confessional statements, call detail records (CDRs), and an email as evidence against the applicant. However, the court examined the confessions made by co-accused Mohammed Amir (A-1) and Aakif (A-11) and found no corroborative material or evidence to substantiate the allegations that the applicant had visited Bangladesh to collect funds.

Bombay High court observed, "There is no evidence on record to show that the applicant visited Bangladesh to collect funds as alleged by the prosecution." It further noted that the confessions of the co-accused did not clearly establish the applicant's involvement in the alleged crimes or his knowledge of the purpose for which he was sent to Bangladesh.

The court also considered an email sent by the applicant to Mohammed Amir (A-11) but found it to be inconclusive and not incriminating. The absence of a Section 65B Certificate, which authenticates electronic evidence, further weakened the prosecution's case. The court acknowledged that the applicant had been in custody for 17 years, during which he pursued educational endeavors, completed a yoga course, and engaged in counseling and de-radicalization sessions within the prison.

Citing these factors, the court concluded that the applicant had made a prima facie case for the suspension of his sentence and granted him bail. However, the court imposed specific conditions, including the submission of a personal recognizance bond of Rs. 50,000 and regular reporting to the ATS. The applicant was also directed to deposit his passport, inform the court and investigating authorities of any changes in address or contact details, and obtain permission before leaving Maharashtra.

This judgment holds significance as it emphasizes the importance of substantive evidence in criminal cases and highlights the need for proper adherence to procedural requirements when introducing electronic evidence. The granting of bail to Afroz Khan Shahid Khan Pathan after 17 years in custody underscores the court's recognition of his educational pursuits and rehabilitation efforts.

Date of Decision: 22nd June 2023

Afroz Khan Shahid vs The State of Maharashtra

Latest Legal News