Mumbai, August 2, 2022 – Nitin Kisan Khatri’s bail application has been rejected by the Sessions Court in Mumbai. Khatri was arrested in connection with Crime No. 687/2021, registered at Chembur Police Station, for offenses under Sections 307 (attempt to murder), 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke¹ breach of the peace), 141 (unlawful assembly), 143 (punishment for unlawful assembly), 144 (joining unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapon), 147 (punishment for rioting), 148 (rioting, armed with deadly weapon), 149² (every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offense committed in prosecution of common object),³ and 332 (voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The Allegations

According to the prosecution, Khatri, along with others, used deadly weapons to cause injuries to the complainant and other witnesses.

Khatri’s Defense and Arguments

Advocate Keshav Chavan, representing Khatri, argued that his client was falsely implicated. He stated that the injured party had been discharged from the hospital with only simple injuries and that the incident occurred in the heat of the moment. He also argued that the police had completed the investigation and filed a charge sheet, making further custodial interrogation unnecessary. Khatri, a permanent resident of Mumbai, expressed his willingness to abide by any conditions imposed by the court.

Prosecution’s Objections

Mr. R.A. Mahakal, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), opposed the bail application, citing Khatri’s extensive criminal record. He stated that Khatri had been deported for a year under Section 56 of the Mumbai Police Act and had violated that order by re-entering the city and assaulting the complainant. The prosecution argued that Khatri played an active role in the commission of the offense.

Court’s Observations and Decision

Additional Sessions Judge S.D. Kulkarni considered the submissions and the documents on record. The court acknowledged Khatri’s extensive criminal record, including his deportation and subsequent violation. The court also noted that the offense was serious and that Khatri, the complainant, and witnesses resided in the same locality.

“The informant, witnesses and this accused persons are residing in the same locality. Therefore, if accused release on bail there is possibility of threatening the prosecution witnesses. There is possibility of tampering the prosecution evidence. Considering the previous criminal antecedents there is possibility of again scuffle in between both the parties,” Judge Kulkarni stated in the order.

The court concluded that releasing Khatri on bail would pose a risk of witness intimidation and tampering with evidence. The court also expressed concern about the potential for further conflict between the parties, given Khatri’s prior criminal record.

“Though the charge­sheet is filed but there is possibility of threatening the prosecution witnesses therefore, in my opinion applicant / accused is not entitled to release on bail,” Judge Kulkarni stated.

Order

Bail Application No. 1738/2022 was rejected.

Key Points

• Prior Criminal Record: Khatri had an extensive criminal record, including deportation and violation of the deportation order.
• Witness Intimidation Risk: The court expressed concern about the risk of Khatri intimidating witnesses.
• Tampering with Evidence: The court also expressed concern about the risk of Khatri tampering with evidence.
• Potential for Further Conflict: The court highlighted the potential for further conflict between the parties.
• Serious Offenses: The case involved serious offenses, including attempted murder and assault with deadly weapons.
• Charge sheet filed: Although the charge sheet was filed, the court still denied bail due to the risk of witness tampering.