Mumbai, January 19, 2024 – Madhav Mukund Phadtare has been denied bail by the Sessions Court in Mumbai in connection with an alleged attempted murder case. Phadtare was arrested in connection with Crime No. 529/2023, registered at N.M. Joshi Marg Police Station, for offenses under Sections 307 (attempt to murder), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506(2)1 (criminal intimidation), and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian2 Penal Code.
The Allegations
The case stems from a complaint filed by Madhav Mukund Phadtare, who reported that his wife, Rama, was crying and had blood on her T-shirt when he returned home on September 13, 2023. He also noticed an injury on his mother’s forehead. Rama subsequently disclosed that his uncle, Charudatta, had trespassed into their home, abused her, and assaulted her and his mother. She further alleged that Madhav’s cousin, Shridhar, had assaulted her with a knife on her chest.
Phadtare’s Defense and Arguments
Mr. Satish Muley, representing Phadtare, argued that his client was falsely implicated and innocent. He contended that the FIR did not sufficiently establish an offense under Section 307 of the IPC against Phadtare and that he was ready to abide by any bail conditions. He also argued that his custodial interrogation was unnecessary. He pointed out that co-accused Charudatta had been granted bail by the High Court and attempted to highlight discrepancies in the time of the incident and statements of witnesses. He further argued that the medical report showed only simple injuries.
Prosecution’s Objections
Mr. Siroya, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), opposed the bail application, arguing that the allegations against Phadtare were serious and that there was evidence connecting him to the offense. He expressed concerns about the possibility of Phadtare tampering with evidence. Shridhar Charudatta Phadtare, the original complainant, also appeared and opposed the bail application.
Court’s Observations and Decision
Additional Sessions Judge Shri R.R. Patare considered the submissions from both sides and the documents on record. The court noted that Phadtare was alleged to have committed house trespass and assaulted the complainant’s wife and mother, causing a knife injury to the wife’s chest.
“It is the allegation of prosecution that accused Sridhar caused stabbed injury to the wife of informant on chest. The allegations made against accused are of serious and grave nature,” Judge Patare stated in the order.
The court found that there was evidence connecting Phadtare to the offense and that the possibility of tampering with evidence could not be ruled out. The court also noted that the role attributed to Phadtare was different from that of co-accused Charudatta, who had been granted bail. The court also stated that the case laws cited by the applicant were not applicable to this case.
“The role attributed to the present applicant/accused is altogether different. No allegation are made against co-accused regarding assault by knife . Allegations are made by applicant /accused has made assault by knife on vital part of body. In such circumstances applicant/accused cannot be enlarged on bail,” Judge Patare stated.
Decision
The court rejected Phadtare’s bail application.
Key Points
- Section 307 IPC: This section deals with the offense of attempt to murder.
- Differing Roles: The court highlighted the differing roles of the accused, which influenced the bail decision.
- Evidence and Tampering: The court expressed concerns about the evidence and the possibility of tampering.
- Case Law Applicability: The court found that the cited case laws did not apply to the present case.