Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NEELA GOKHALE
Arbaz Mohd Parvez Shaikh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.
1. The Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with C.R. No. 220 of 2025 dated 19th April 2025 registered with the Mankhurd Police Station, Mumbai for the offences punishable under Sections 118 (2), 118(1), 352, 115(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“ BNS ”).
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that on 18th April 2025, there was a quarrel between the family members of the deceased and the Applicant. The issue on the basis of which the quarrel took place was that the deceased’s daughter, aged 15 years, used to talk to one of the boys in the Applicant’s family. The family of the deceased went to the house of the Applicant’s family to resolve the matter and to convey to the Applicant’s family members that their son should not meet the deceased’s daughter. There was some dispute between the family members, which led to an altercation. The family members of the Applicant registered an NC complaint with the police station concerned. Similarly, the family members of the deceased were called to the police station for inquiry. They also registered an NC complaint against the Applicant and his family. It is the allegation of
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.
The court found that the absence of premeditation and the lack of weapon use justified the granting of bail, considering the lengthy trial ahead.
A prolonged trial delay and lack of meritorious evidence can warrant bail, even for serious charges.
Accused granted bail pending trial as no sufficient grounds for continued detention were established.
Pre-arrest bail granted due to insufficient evidence of awareness regarding the complainant's husband's medical condition.
The court denied bail due to the seriousness and premeditation of the alleged crime, viewing the applicant's claim of innocence with skepticism.
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.
Bail can be granted if the nature of alleged offenses does not justify custodial detention, particularly when the accused has clean antecedents and no immediate act causing fatal consequences is esta....
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
