Mumbai, July 14, 2022 – Deepak @ Nepali Bhagu Kesari and Chetan Raju Singh’s bail application has been rejected by the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay in connection with an assault case. Additional Sessions Judge S.M. Menjoge denied bail, citing the severity of the offense, the ongoing investigation, and the potential for witness tampering.

Kesari and Singh, both 20 or 21, were arrested in connection with Crime No. 587/2022, registered at Mankhurd Police Station. They were charged with offenses punishable under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons¹ or means), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (criminal intimidation), and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of² the Indian Penal Code.

The Allegations and Complainant’s Account

The complainant, Prathmesh Chavan, reported that on June 16, 2022, he and his friends, Akshay Mirgule and Soham Pawar, were returning from Mankhurd Railway Station. When Mirgule and Pawar went to use a public toilet, Kesari allegedly stopped them and began abusing them. Singh and another individual, Babu, then joined in and assaulted Mirgule and Pawar. When Chavan tried to intervene, he was also assaulted. Later, Kesari, Singh, and Babu chased Chavan and his friends, and Singh allegedly struck Chavan and Bhushan Das on the head with an iron rod, causing injuries.

Defense Arguments and Court’s Observations

The defense argued that the accused were falsely implicated, that no prima facie case was made out against them, and that there was no reason to keep them in custody. They requested that the accused be released on bail.

The prosecution opposed the bail application, arguing that the offense was serious, the investigation was ongoing, and the accused might pressure witnesses if released.

The court, after reviewing the case diary and considering the arguments from both sides, noted the following:

• Assault with Iron Rods: The accused allegedly assaulted Chavan and Das with iron rods, causing head injuries.
• Recovery of Weapon: The iron rod was recovered from the accused.
• Two Incidents on the Same Day: The accused allegedly initiated two altercations on the same day and pursued the complainants with iron rods, indicating a premeditated intent to cause injury.
• Serious Offense: The offense was deemed serious.
• Ongoing Investigation: The investigation was ongoing, and the charge sheet had not been filed.
• Potential for Witness Tampering: There was a possibility that the accused might pressure witnesses if released.
• Differing Roles: The court distinguished the roles of the co-accused, Babu, who had been granted bail, noting that Babu did not use a weapon.

Reasons for Denying Bail

The court denied bail based on:

• Severity of the Offense: The assault with iron rods causing head injuries was considered a serious offense.
• Ongoing Investigation: The investigation was ongoing, and the charge sheet had not been filed.
• Potential for Witness Tampering: There was a possibility that the accused might pressure witnesses if released.
• Differing Roles of Co-Accused: The court distinguished the roles of the co-accused, Babu, who had been granted bail, noting that Babu did not use a weapon.
• Possibility of Repetition: There was a possibility of the accused repeating a similar offense if released.

Implications and Future Proceedings

The denial of bail underscores the court’s consideration of the seriousness of the alleged offense and the need to protect witnesses and ensure the integrity of the investigation. The case will proceed with further investigation and trial, where the prosecution will present its evidence, and the defense will have the opportunity to challenge the allegations. This decision reflects the courts careful consideration of facts and circumstances in criminal proceedings.