In a bail application regarding alleged murder, the High Court rejected the plea on prima facie grounds due to the gravity of the charges and the lack of provocation. However, it directed expedited trial within 12 months.
None granted; bail application rejected and trial expedited.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
ba.529.18.13.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 529 OF 2018
Amit Indradev Gupta ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr. Manoj S. Mohite a/w Ms. Regina Correia I/b Mr. A. V. Chatuphale for the Applicant
Ms. J. S. Lohokare, A.P.P for the Respondent-State
PSI Mr. Chirmade from Kapurbawdi Police Station, Thane, is present
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. WEDNESDAY, 25th APRIL, 2018
P.C. :
in connection with C.R. No. I-1 of 2017 registered with the Kapurbawdi
Police Station, Thane, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
the intervening night of 31st December, 2016 and 1st January, 2017. According to the complainant-Sachin More, an eye-witness to the incident,
1/4
SQ Pathan
ba.529.18.13.doc
he and Vikas were returning home after celebrating New Year; at around 12:45/1:00 a.m. He has alleged that there was a quarrel between Vikas and the applicant with respect to where the car would go; the deceased-Vikas wanted to go to Kalyan, whereas, the applicant who was sitting in the car, wanted the car to go to Mumbra. It is alleged by the complainant, that deceased-Vikas came and informed him about the same i.e that there was a quarrel between them. He has further stated that when they were talking to each other and when Vikas was asking the auto rickshaw driver, whether he would go to Kalyan, just then, at about 1:30 a.m, the applicant came with three unknown persons and started assaulting Vikas. The applicant is alleged to have assaulted Vikas with a knife on his abdomen. A perusal of the post mortem report shows that the deceased had sustained an incised wound over left cheek from angle of mouth to preauricular region about 10 x 1½ cm x 1½ cm; incised wound over left zygomatic region about 2 x ½ x ½ cm; stab wound over right side below umbilic hypogastilic region 3 cm penetrating upto intestinal walls, as a result of which, he succumbed to the same. The post-mortem report shows that the deceased had also sustained two stab wound injuries; punctured wound on right side below umbilical region CLW On left side of face 15 x 2 x 2 cm.
2/4
SQ Pathan
ba.529.18.13.doc
and deceased were not known to each other and as such, there was no motive for the applicant to assault the deceased; that the incident took place at the spur of the moment and at the highest, the offence would be under Section 304. Whether or not, the offence would be one under Section 302 or a lesser offence, is a matter which will be considered by the trial Court, during trial. Prima facie, it appears that the applicant was carrying a knife and without any provocation, assaulted the deceased with the knife. The deceased expired due to the injuries (mentioned in para 3) sustained by him.
5. Considering the aforesaid, this is not a fit case to enlarge the
applicant on bail. The application is accordingly rejected. However, the trial of the applicant is expedited.
within a reasonable period i.e. 12 months from today, the applicant is at liberty to file a fresh application.
3/4
SQ Pathan
ba.529.18.13.doc
REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
4/4
SQ Pathan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant should be enlarged on bail in a case involving alleged murder.
Whether the trial requires expedition because of the severity of the charges.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amit Indradev Gupta
The State of Maharashtra
Revati Mohite Dere
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
