Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SHYAM C.CHANDAK
Aditya Avinash Sood – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
1. Denial of bail by the trial Court leads the Applicants to file these Applications seeking their release on bail in Special Case (ACB) No.917/2024 arising out of C.R.No.306/2024 registered with Yerwada Police Station, Dist. Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 304 , 279, 337, 338, 427, 120-B, 201, 213, 214, 466, 467, 468, 471, 109 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “ IPC ”) and Sections 7 , 7-A, 8, 12, 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short “PC Act”) and Sections 184 , 185, 199/177, 3(1)/180, 5(1)/181, 199 (a) of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short “MV Act”).
2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel/Counsel appearing for the respective Applicant, Mr. Hiray, the learned Special PP for the Respondent – State and Mr. Ankit Patil, the learned Counsel appearing for the Intervenor. Perused the Applications, the Affidavit-in-reply and the relevant documents.
3. The prosecution story is that, applicant Vishal is father of “V” (“CCL”). On 19/05/2024, at about 2.00 AM, said CCL, his friends Aayush Sood, Naman Singh and Adi Shaikh were returning from a party in a Porshe car bearing no RTO registered number plate. The CC
The court emphasized that bail is an exception, not a rule, particularly in serious cases involving conspiracy and evidence tampering, considering the likelihood of witness intimidation.
The court affirmed that under Section 437(6) of the CrPC, the magistrate's discretion in denying bail is contingent upon justifiable reasons, balancing trial delays against the need to preserve justi....
Failure to serve grounds of arrest immediately renders the arrest illegal, entitling the accused to bail, emphasizing the importance of personal liberty and compliance with constitutional rights.
The court emphasized that in economic offences, especially under the PMLA, bail should not be granted unless the accused demonstrates they are not guilty and unlikely to commit further offences.
The court ruled that the seriousness of charges and ongoing risk to witnesses outweigh the defendant's custody length and medical claims, justifying bail denial.
The court established that while the charges are serious, the evidence collected does not necessitate continued detention, leading to the granting of bail under stringent conditions for accountabilit....
The court emphasized that bail is the exception, not the rule, particularly in serious economic offences, where the risk of tampering with evidence and flight is significant.
The court emphasized the necessity of a fair trial under Article 21, highlighting the risk of witness tampering due to the petitioners' influential status, leading to the dismissal of A.6's bail and ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
