Mumbai, April 24, 2024 – Prashant Naharsingh Walmiki (27) and Eknath Krishna Rokade (26), arrested in connection with an assault case in Mankhurd, Mumbai, have been granted bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai. The duo were arrested under charges including attempted murder, robbery, and offenses under the Arms Act.

The case, registered as C.R. No. 102/2024 at Mankhurd Police Station, involves allegations of a violent assault on March 25, 2024.

Details of the Allegations and Arrest

According to the First Information Report (FIR), on March 25, 2024, around 5:00 PM, the complainant was walking near Sawant Tea Shop in PMGP Colony, Mankhurd, when Walmiki and Rokade confronted him. They allegedly abused him, forcibly took ₹2,000 from his pocket, and assaulted him. Rokade allegedly threw a “Koita” (a sharp weapon) at the complainant’s head, which was intercepted by the complainant’s father. Walmiki then allegedly stabbed the complainant in the chest with a knife.

The police subsequently arrested Walmiki and Rokade and seized the alleged weapon used in the assault. The complainant, who was hospitalized, has since been discharged and is out of danger.

Defense Arguments and Prosecution Objections

Arvind Jaiswar, Advocate for the applicants, argued that his clients were falsely implicated in the case. He emphasized that the weapon had already been recovered from another accused and that there was no need for further custodial interrogation of Walmiki and Rokade. He also asserted that his clients were ready to cooperate with the police and were permanent residents of Mumbai, with reputations in the community.

The prosecution, represented by J.N. Suryawanshi, APP, and the investigating officer, opposed the bail application. They argued that the offenses were serious, involving specific allegations of a knife assault. They also expressed concerns that, given the applicants and the complainant resided in the same locality, releasing the accused on bail could lead to tampering with evidence.

Court’s Observations and Decision

H.H. Additional Sessions Judge A.A. Kulkarni, presiding over the case, considered the submissions from both sides and reviewed the FIR and other documents. The court noted that the alleged weapon had already been seized and that the complainant was out of danger.

The court stated, “In such circumstance nothing is to be seized at the instance of applicants. In such circumstance, I am of the opinion that there is no need to further detention of applicants. Applicants may be directed to appear before investigating officer during course of investigation and co-operate.”

Acknowledging the prosecution’s concerns about potential tampering of evidence, the court directed the applicants to appear before the investigating officer regularly until the investigation is completed.

Bail Conditions and Order

The court granted bail to Prashant Naharsingh Walmiki and Eknath Krishna Rokade, subject to the following conditions:

• Each applicant must furnish a Personal Recognizance (P.R.) bond and a Surety Bond (S.B.) of ₹25,000, along with one or more sureties of the same amount.
• They must attend Mankhurd Police Station as and when required by the investigating officer.
• They must provide their residential address proof and contact numbers to the investigating officer.
• They must not directly or indirectly influence, threaten, or promise any person related to the case.
• They must not leave India without prior permission from the court.
• They must complete the bail process before the learned court below.

“Criminal Bail Application No. 903 of 2024 is allowed,” the court order stated. “Applicant/accused shall attend Mankhurd Police Station, Mumbai, as and when required by Investigating Officer on notice.”

Implications and Public Reaction

The granting of bail in this case highlights the court’s consideration of the progress of the investigation and the individual rights of the accused. The decision underscores the importance of balancing the need for continued investigation with the presumption of innocence.

The court’s directive for the accused to cooperate with the investigation reflects a measure to ensure that the process is not hindered. The case also draws attention to the issue of local disputes and potential violence within communities, emphasizing the need for effective law enforcement and community policing.