The court observed that while the accusations were serious — including charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Arms Act, and multiple State Acts — the investigation was complete, a chargesheet had been filed, and prolonged incarceration without trial would serve little purpose.
Disposing of the bail applications, the judge ordered that the applicants — Mohammad Iqbal Ismail Ansari; Mohd. Absar Mohd. Ismail Ansari; Mohd. Izhar Mohd. Ismail Ansari; Mohd. Ejaz Mohd. Ismail Ansari; Mohammad Rahil; Mohammad Yasir; Mohd. Muzammil Ansari; Ashfaque Ullah Khan, and Mohd. Iftekhar Mohd. Sabir — be released on bail on their executing a bond in the sum of ₹1 lakh each with one solvent surety of the like amount each.
The accused were arrested under Sections 45, 49, 50, 61(2), 74, 76, 79, 109, 115(2), 117(2), 117(4), 118(1), 118(2), 121(1), 121(2), 125, 126(2), 127(2), 132, 135, 189,(2), 189(3), 189(4), 189(5), 189(9), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 192, 195(1), 195(2), 196(1), 197(1), 223, 296, 324(2), 324(3), 324(4), 324(5), 324(6), 326(F), 326(G), 351(2), 351(3), 352, and 353(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita read with Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act read with Section 3 of the Maharashtra Prevention of Defacement of Property Act and under Sections 3, 4, and 5 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act and under Sections 37(1) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act.
The judge ordered that the applicants should not indulge in the similar type of activities and one single registration of the crime of the similar nature would lead to cancellation of bail. They should not induce or threat or promise to any of witnesses connected with the crime in question and should not tamper with the prosecution evidence. The applicants should attend proceedings before the trial on every date without seeking any exemption, unless there were exceptional circumstances.
“It is a settled principle of law that ‘bail is rule and jail is exception’. Considering the investigation is already completed and chargesheet is already filed, no purpose will be served by keeping the applicants behind bar and the trial will take its own time for its final disposal,” the judge said.
‘Threat to public order’
The prosecution strongly opposed the bail, with Senior Public Prosecutor D.V. Chauhan argued that the alleged actions amounted to “a form of terrorism” and posed a threat to public order and safety. He cited CCTV footage, mobile location records, and a WhatsApp group named “Sunni Youth Force,” allegedly used to mobilise the mob, as evidence of the applicants’ involvement.
However, defence counsel — including senior advocate A.V. Gupta and others — countered that the evidence, including Call Detail Records (CDRs) and belatedly conducted test identification parades, did not substantiate specific roles for the accused. They argued that the accused had been arrested primarily on suspicion and had already spent more than three months in custody without trial.
Advocate Mohammad Aadil Sheikh, appearing for one of the accused, argued that the probe in the case was complete and hence the accused should be granted bail.
According to police reports, stone pelting and arson were reported in several parts of Nagpur on March 17 after rumours began circulating about a ‘chadar’ with holy inscriptions being burnt during protests led by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) seeking the removal of Aurangzeb’s tomb located at Khultabad town in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar district.
Assistant Police Inspector Jitendra Gadge, who was on duty, reported that a large group of nearly 500–600 people from the Muslim community later gathered at the Gandhi Gate, raising slogans and reportedly attacking police personnel with stones and petrol bombs.
The applicants also caused damage to the public and government property. Five Deputy Commissioners of Police, one Assistant Sub Inspector and 25 police constables who were trying to keep peace and maintain law and order situation, sustained injuries in the alleged incident. CCTV footage discloses involvement of applicants in the alleged incident. Statements of witnesses disclose involvement of applicants in provoking the public at large.
At various places, people started gathering along with weapons and the accused attacked police personnel at Bhaldarpura Square with deadly weapons and stones. They used petrol bombs and abused police officers. The mob also outraged modesty of women police officers and constables and abused them in filthy language. They also caused damage to vehicles, the police charge sheet said.
Some persons burnt effigies of grave of Aurangzeb at Shree Chhatrapati Maharaj Statue, Gandhi Gate, Mahal, Nagpur. The said incident was reported by one Faheem Khan by approaching the police station along with 50-60 persons. On the basis of the said report, the crime was registered under Section 223 of the BNSS read with Sections 37(1) and 37(2) and 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act against nine persons.
More than 123 persons, including 19 juveniles, were arrested by the Nagpur police following the riots.
Published – June 25, 2025 11:12 pm IST
Discover more from News Hub
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
