Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

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