Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NEELA GOKHALE
Ajay Sanjay Shirsath – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
1. The Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with FIR No.128/2022 dated 09/04/2022 registered with Madhyavarti Police Station, Thane City, for the offences punishable under sections 394 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Thereafter, the person injured succumbed to his injuries and hence section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added to the charge-sheet.
2. It is the story of the prosecution, based on the statement given by the son of the deceased that, the deceased was in the habit of going to the public toilet at 05.00 a.m. every day. On the fatal day i.e. 09/04/2022, at around 05.15 a.m., the deceased left home to go to the public toilet. He was carrying a mobile phone belonging to the first informant of OPPO Company-A3S. His own mobile phone was at home. Since he did not return home upto 08.30 a.m., the First informant was worried and therefore he went in search of his father. On the road leading to the toilet, he was informed by two people that around 05.15 a.m., one person walking towards the public toilet, was beaten up by two assailants on a motorcycle and was left on the road in an injured condition. The said person was taken to the h
A prolonged trial delay and lack of meritorious evidence can warrant bail, even for serious charges.
The court found that the absence of premeditation and the lack of weapon use justified the granting of bail, considering the lengthy trial ahead.
The court must balance individual liberty and societal interests when evaluating bail requests based on prima facie evidence of complicity in serious crimes.
Court emphasized the necessity of strong evidence of premeditation for custody in serious allegations, finding contradictions in victim's family's statements sufficient to grant bail.
Indefinite detention without trial is not justifiable; a court can grant bail under strict conditions to ensure the accused's attendance at trial.
The principle of parity cannot be the sole basis for bail; serious evidence against the accused warrants denial of bail despite prolonged incarceration.
The court emphasized that bail should not be granted if there is a strong likelihood of witness tampering and the accused is charged with a serious offence.
The court determined that in the absence of serious evidence of guilt, bail should be granted to a petitioner with no prior criminal history under stipulated conditions.
A bail application is granted when continued detention lacks necessity, subject to specific compliance conditions.
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
