HC grants bail to gangster in 2016 double murder case

The Bombay High Court granted bail to gangster Zulfikar Yasin Behlim in a 2016 double murder case, citing long pre-trial detention and slow proceedings.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Monday granted bail to gangster Zulfikar Yasin Behlim, an accused in a 2016 double murder case, citing long pre-trial incarceration and slow pace of trial proceedings.

HC grants bail to gangster in 2016 double murder case

Behlim, in judicial custody since September 2016, had spent over eight years in jail without significant progress in the trial. The court noted that out of the 129 prosecution witnesses cited, only 15 had been examined so far.

The case stems from a violent incident on July 27, 2016, when six armed individuals allegedly entered the office of Housing Development and Infrastructure Ltd in Santacruz and fatally attacked two staff members, leaving another person injured. The attack was linked to earlier instances of extortion and threats.

Behlim was alleged to have assisted in the crime by transporting the perpetrators to the crime scene on his rickshaw. Following the murders, Behlim and five other accused were arrested under provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).

During the hearing, Behlim’s counsel led by advocates Ravi Dwivedi, Sainath S. Baji and Satish R. Shukla argued that his client was not directly involved in the assault. They highlighted that Behlim’s prolonged incarceration violated his right to a speedy trial. Citing precedents set by the Supreme Court, the defence emphasised that extended imprisonment of undertrial prisoners without trial resolution necessitates bail.

The prosecution opposed the plea, arguing that the gravity of the charges and the invocation of MCOCA required a stringent approach. They expressed concerns that Behlim’s release might result in witness tampering or evidence manipulation.

Justice Manish Pitale, while granting Behlim bail, emphasised that the principles of justice demand intervention in cases of undue incarceration. The court noted that the delay in trial proceedings and the remote likelihood of its conclusion within a reasonable timeframe justified the decision.

Conditions for bail include furnishing a bond of ₹50,000, regular reporting to the police, and refraining from entering the jurisdiction of the concerned police station and interfering with evidence.