Mumbai, Maharashtra – June 8, 2022 – Vasant Bhupathi Mahesh Nadar and Laxman Mani Nadar have been granted bail in an assault case registered at Shahu Nagar Police Station (Crime No. 91 of 2022). The Additional Sessions Judge, Vishal S. Gaike, of the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai, approved their bail application (Bail Application No. 954 of 2022) citing the lack of prima facie applicability of Section 307 (attempt to murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the substantial progress of the investigation.

Background of the Case:

The Nadars were arrested and charged under Sections 307, 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means),¹ 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (criminal intimidation),² 143 (unlawful assembly), 145 (joining or continuing in unlawful assembly, knowing it has been commanded to disperse), 147 (rioting),³ and 149 (every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offense committed in prosecution of common object) of the IPC, Section 37(1) read with 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, and Section 4 read with 25 of the Indian Arms Act.

Allegations and Arrest:

According to the prosecution, on April 6, 2022, the complainant, Peter Ponraj, and his friends were walking towards Anna Nagar when they encountered Adhistharaja, who called Isai Balan towards him. When Balan was reluctant, an altercation ensued, and Adhistharaja and his friends, including the Nadars, allegedly assaulted Balan. Adhistharaja reportedly asked Anil Shelte and Vasant Nadar to bring a sickle, with which Adhistharaja then assaulted Balan. The complainant and his friends intervened and took Balan to Sion Hospital, where he was admitted to the ICU.

Defense Arguments:

Ms. Sangeeta B. Suchdev, representing the Nadars, argued that her clients were innocent and falsely implicated. She argued that the ingredients of Section 307 of the IPC were not attracted, as there was no prima facie evidence of an intention to kill. She also pointed out that the time of information received at the police station was not disclosed in the FIR, Laxman Nadar’s name was not mentioned in the FIR, and no weapon was attributed to the Nadars. She highlighted that the investigation was almost complete and requested bail.

Prosecution’s Counter-Arguments:

Mr. J.N. Suryawanshi, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), opposed the bail application, arguing that the investigation was ongoing, the Nadars were habitual offenders, and they might commit further offenses.

Intervener’s Arguments:

Mr. Asif Latif Shaikh, representing the intervener (complainant), also opposed the bail application.

Court’s Observations and Decision:

Judge Gaike noted that the victim had sustained one grievous injury on his head and eight simple injuries. He observed that the FIR suggested a sudden fight between two groups. He also noted that Laxman Nadar’s name was not in the FIR and that the ingredients of Section 307 of the IPC were not prima facie attracted.

“The contents of the F.I.R. reflects that there was sudden fight between two groups in which the victim may have sustained the alleged injuries. The name of applicant No.2 is not appearing in the F.I.R. From the contents of F.I.R., prima facie, ingredients of Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code are not attracted. The police have invoked Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of additional statement of the informant recorded 3 days after the incident,” Judge Gaike stated in his order.

The court also noted that the substantial investigation was complete, the victim had been discharged from the hospital, and the Nadars were young men from Tamil Nadu working in Mumbai.

“The contents of case diary reflects that substantial investigation has been completed. Admittedly, the victim is discharged from the Hospital in the month of April itself. The criminal antecedents of the applicants are alleged by the investigating agency. But, no details of it are given in the say of the Investigating Officer. The applicants are young boys of 24 years and 23 years of age respectively. Both the applicants are from the State of Tamil Nadu and staying in Maharashtra for their livelihood. Their appears no prima facie possibility that they would flee away from justice or commit similar offence,” Judge Gaike stated.

The court concluded that the Nadars were entitled to bail, subject to certain conditions.

Order:

The court granted bail to the Nadars, subject to the following conditions:

• They must execute a Personal Recognizance (PR) bond of Rs. 15,000 each with two solvent sureties of the same amount.
• They must not tamper with prosecution witnesses or evidence.
• They must provide their detailed addresses, mobile/contact numbers, address proof, and identity proof.
• They must inform the court and investigating officer of any change in their residence or mobile/contact number.
• They must attend court regularly.
• They must not leave the jurisdiction of the court without permission.
• They must not threaten or pressurize the complainant and witnesses.

Significance of the Ruling:

This ruling highlights the court’s consideration of the applicability of stringent charges, the progress of the investigation, and the personal circumstances of the accused when deciding bail applications in assault cases. The court’s decision underscores that in cases where the ingredients of more serious charges are not prima facie attracted and the investigation is substantially complete, bail can be granted with appropriate conditions to ensure the accused’s presence and prevent witness tampering.

Key Factors in the Bail Grant:

• Lack of prima facie applicability of Section 307 of the IPC.
• Substantial progress of the investigation.
• The Nadars’ young age and their status as migrant workers.
• Conditions to ensure the Nadars’ presence and prevent witness tampering.

Future Proceedings:

The trial will proceed in the Sessions Court, where the prosecution will be required to prove the charges against the Nadars and the other accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The court will monitor the Nadars’ compliance with the bail conditions.