Synopsis

The appellant (accused no.3) was arrested by the NIA in connection with a case involving counterfeit currency notes, illegal arms, and links to a wanted terrorist (Javed Chikna, listed under Schedule IV of the UAP Act). His bail application was rejected by the Special Court, and he appealed under Section 21(4) of the NIA Act. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the prosecution had placed sufficient prima facie material to show the appellant’s involvement: unexplained financial transfers between brothers, internet search for IP address change, communication from an international number linked to a wanted accused, and recovery of arms and photographs of weapons from his residence. The court found that the explanation of “household expenses” for large transfers was implausible, and that the material cumulatively established the appellant’s nexus with unlawful activities.

Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice A. S. Gadkari and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kamal Khata (Division Bench)

Date of Judgment: 6th May 2026

Citation: Criminal Appeal No.912 of 2024 (unreported)

Core Law: National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 – Section 21(4) (appeal against rejection of bail); Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Section 18 (conspiracy for terrorist act); Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 120B, 489A, 489B, 489C (criminal conspiracy and counterfeit currency).

1.  Heading of the judgment

High court of judicature at bombay criminal appellate jurisdiction

Criminal appeal no.912 of 2024

Mohammed fayaz shikilkar (appellant) vs. State of maharashtra & anr (respondents)

Coram: hon’ble mr. justice a. s. gadkari and hon’ble mr. justice kamal khata (division bench)

Reserved on: 24th march, 2026; pronounced on: 6th may, 2026

2. Legal framework

Major laws and provisions involved:

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.