IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
Tejas Shamsunder Shinde - Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Bail Application No. 544 of 2024
Decided On : 03-02-2025
(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 302 - Bail application in a murder case involving the Applicant's father - The incident occurred during a verbal altercation, with the victim being bed-ridden and suffering from chronic ailments - The Applicant, a 20-year-old student, acted under provocation after repeated abuse from the victim - The court considered the Applicant's age, educational background, and the circumstances leading to the incident in granting bail. (Paras 2, 3, 27, 28)
(B) Young Offenders - The court emphasized the need for rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders, referencing the Probation of Offenders Act and the importance of education in preventing recidivism. (Paras 20, 21, 24)
Facts of the case:
The Applicant, a 20-year-old student, was accused of murdering his father during a heated argument. The victim was bed-ridden and had a history of chronic alcoholism and health issues. The altercation escalated after the Applicant intervened against the victim's medication. (Paras 3, 4, 6)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the Applicant acted under grave provocation and emphasized the importance of allowing him to continue his education rather than subjecting him to incarceration. (Paras 18, 27)
Issues: The main issues included whether the Applicant's actions were premeditated and the appropriateness of granting bail considering his age and circumstances. (Paras 11, 27)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Applicant's young age and the provocation he faced warranted consideration for bail, highlighting the need for rehabilitation and the potential negative impact of incarceration on his future. (Paras 18, 28)
Result: Bail Application stands allowed and disposed.
JUDGMENT :
[MILIND N. JADHAV, J.]
1. Heard Ms. Pai, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Ganapathy, learned APP for Respondent – the State of Maharashtra.
2. This is an Application by Applicant who is 20 years old under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.48 of 2023 registered with Tilak Nagar Police Station, Dombivali (East), Kalyan indicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’).
3. The victim in the present case is the Applicant’s own father who was about 69 years old on the date of the incident. The incident happened on 22.02.2023 at about 05:00 p.m. in the evening. Record shows that the victim was unwell and bed-ridden. Seldom he used to get up from his bed for his ablutions and he would require care and support even for passing urine. A urine pot is present in the house and admittedly victim’s wife and Applicant both being his immediate and close family members used to aid and assist the victim for the same.
4. In the above backdrop on the date of incident it is seen that at about 13:30 hours (01:30 p.m.) Applicant returned back from his college. He completed his Higher Secondary Certificate School Examination having scored 78.83 % marks and was pursuing further education as a Second Year student of Bachelor of Management studies in K. V. Pendharkar College, Dombivali (East), District – Thane. The record also shows that the victim was a chronic alcoholic, suffering from kidney ailment and used to consume tobacco leading to his medical condition.
5. The mother of Applicant and wife of victim was not present in the house on the date of incident as she used to work as house maid. Record shows that on the date of incident prior to the incident between 01:30 p.m. to 05:00 p.m., Applicant had his lunch after returning from college and was present in the house and on a couple of occasions, the victim i.e. his father passed urine and Applicant aided him to pass urine in the urine pot and also washed the urine pot and kept it back in the same condition.
6. However, at about 05:00 p.m. the victim was taking certain medication / tablets which were opposed to by Applicant on the ground that the said tablets were not prescribed by any physician and they would ultimately harm him if they were taken without prescription. This intervention of Applicant was not taken kindly by his father – the victim who was visibly suffering and there was a verbal altercation between the father and son which escalated further. For a long time even prior to the incident having happened the so- called verbal altercation between the father and the son persisted and it is seen from the record that the father - victim in view of the ignominy suffered by him was constantly hurling abuses on to the Applicant as also, his mother. This repeated barrage of abuses had a deleterious effect on the young mind of Applicant and like any other young son he retaliated by asking his father to ‘shut-up’ and mind his own business and while doing so in return ended up abusing him. All this is confessed by Applicant in his statement which is recorded three days after the incident on 25.02.2023 which is appended at page No.38 of the Application.
7. Thereafter since the victim – father did not arrest the situation and however retaliated by repeatedly abusing the Applicant and his mother, the situation escalated to such an extent that Applicant could not control his urge to quieten the victim i.e. his father leading to inflicting 3 – 4 blows with the milestone (okVk) which was lying in the house. After the father was hurt because of inflicting of the blows he continued abusing the Applicant even thereafter and this situation irked Applicant to such an extent that he immediately lay hand on the kitchen knife and inflicted a sharp incised wound on his neck to quieten him.
8. What transpired thereafter is that Applicant came out of his house and bolted the house fro
The court emphasized rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders, allowing bail based on the Applicant's age and circumstances surrounding the incident.
The court emphasized rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders, allowing bail based on the applicant's age, educational background, and circumstances of the incident.
The court emphasized rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders, allowing bail to promote education and prevent recidivism.
The court emphasized a reformative approach for young offenders, prioritizing rehabilitation over punitive measures, especially in cases involving serious allegations against minors.
The court emphasized a reformative approach for young offenders, balancing the seriousness of allegations with the potential for rehabilitation, particularly in cases involving minors.
Pending preliminary assessment, possibility of tampering with evidence, and influencing witnesses are valid reasons for dismissing a bail application, and the custody period and lack of progress in t....
The court emphasized a reformative approach for young offenders, balancing the seriousness of allegations with the potential for rehabilitation.
Bail for juveniles under the Juvenile Justice Act is mandatory unless there are justifiable grounds for denial.
Bail for juveniles under Section 12 of the J.J. Act cannot be denied based solely on the seriousness of the offence; concrete grounds are required to support denial.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.