Allowed

Vishal Dadaji Gavli v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC8 Feb 2024BA/501/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted regular bail to the applicant in a murder case, noting his minimal role as allegedly wiping blood stains, lack of criminal antecedents, and the probable long duration of the trial. Bail was granted subject to conditions regarding police reporting, surrendering passport, and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted with conditions: PR bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties, monthly police reporting, surrender passport, no witness tampering.

Vishal Dadaji Gavli Vs State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

936-BA-506-2024 (S).doc

¶2

Arjun

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

BAIL APPLICATION NO.501 OF 2024 Vishal Dadaji Gavli …Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra …Respondent _______________________________________________________________ Mr. Chetan Deshmukh, for the Applicant. Ms. S. S. Kaushik, APP, for the Respondent-State.

¶5

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 08, 2024

¶6

P.C.:

¶7

1. Heard Mr. Deshmukh, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant and Ms. Kaushik, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State.

¶8

2. This regular Bail Application is preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The relevant details are as follows:-

¶9

1	C. R. No.	174 of 2023
2	Date of registration of F.I.R.	10/07/2023
3	Name of Police Station	Indiranagar Station, Nashik	Police
4	Section/s invoked	302 & 34 of the 1860	I.P.C.,
5	Date of incident	10/07/2023
6	Date of arrest	10/07/2023
7	Date of fling Charge-sheet	06/09/2023

¶10

¶11

936-BA-506-2024 (S).doc

¶12

3. The Accused No.1 is the mother of the Applicant. The deceased is husband of Accused No.1 and father of the present Applicant i.e. Accused No.2.

¶13

4. As per the prosecution case, the deceased was in a relationship of outside marriage with wife of Accused No.1’s brother and, therefore, the relations between the deceased and the Accused No.1 were not cordial. Apart from that the deceased was also not providing fnancial support to the Accused No.1, Applicant and the daughter of the Accused No.1. As per the prosecution case, the Accused No.1 has assaulted the deceased with an iron pestle.

¶14

5. Mr. Deshmukh, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submitted that there is no role of the present Applicant in the actual incident and the only role attributed to the present Applicant is that he was wiping the blood stain on the foor.

¶15

6. On the other hand, Ms. Kaushik, learned APP strongly opposed the Bail Application. She pointed out the statement of the daughter of the Accused No.1 i.e. Nisha Dadaji Gavli recorded under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [page 64]. She submitted that there is a recovery and therefore the Bail Application be rejected.

¶16

7. A perusal of the record shows that this is a case of circumstantial evidence.

¶17

¶18

936-BA-506-2024 (S).doc

¶19

8. Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant states that there is no role attributed to the present Applicant in the actual incident and that the only role attributed at the most is that of destruction of the evidence. Prima facie there is substance in the contention of learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant.

¶20

9. The incident in question has taken place on 10th July 2023. The F.I.R. has been lodged on 10th July 2023. It is an admitted position that investigation has been completed and that Chargesheet has been fled on 6th September 2023. There are 36 witnesses as per the Charge-sheet. The trial is unlikely to conclude any time soon and is likely to take a considerably long time.

¶21

10. The Applicant is a student, aged 20 years.

¶22

11. The Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents.

¶23

12. The Applicant does not appear to be at risk of fight.

¶24

13. Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by imposing conditions. In view thereof, the following order:-

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

(a) The Applicant-Vishal Dadaji Gavli be released on bail in connection with C. R. No.174 of 2023 registered with the Indiranagar Police Station, District-Nashik on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶27

(b) On being released on bail, the Applicant shall furnish his

¶28

¶29

936-BA-506-2024 (S).doc

¶30

cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating Offcer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto.

¶31

(c) The Applicant shall report to the Indiranagar Police Station, District-Nashik on the frst Sunday of every month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. until the conclusion of the trial.

¶32

(d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.

¶33

(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not contact or infuence the Complainant or any witnesses in any manner.

¶34

(f) The Applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The Applicant shall co-operate with the Trial Court and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments thereat.

¶35

(g) The Applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the Investigating Offcer.

¶36

14. The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶37

15. It is clarifed that the observations made herein are prima

¶38

facie and the trial Court shall decide the case on its merits and uninfuenced by the observations made in this Order.

¶39

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶40

Vishal Dadaji Gavli v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishal Dadaji Gavli v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi @ Mahesh Sitaram Rathod Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Samir Mohan Jadhav Vs State of Maharashtra

Pradip Dattatray Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yogesh Madan Kadam and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra

Pradeep Hiralal Shinde Vs State of Maharashtra

Pranali Sunil Kadam Vs State of Maharashtra