Mumbai, July 19, 2022 – In a ruling that underscores the importance of evidence and presence at the crime scene, the Additional Sessions Judge Shri A.A. Kulkarni (C.R. No. 24) granted bail to Rajesh Raju Shettiyar, also known as Rajeshwala, in connection with a grievous assault case registered with Crime Branch, Unit V (C.R. No. 45/2022). The court’s decision was based on the applicant’s alibi of being in Coimbatore during the incident and the absence of his name in the initial First Information Report (FIR).

Background of the Case:

Rajesh Raju Shettiyar, a 42-year-old resident of Sion (West), was arrested in connection with a case involving offenses under Sections 367 (kidnapping or abducting in order to subject person to grievous hurt), 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means), 506(2) (criminal intimidation), and 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).¹

The prosecution alleged that Shettiyar, described as a “Ganja Supplier,” had instigated Tanaji Khopde and his three friends to assault the informant. The assault, carried out with an iron rod, resulted in grievous injuries to the informant’s shoulder.

Arguments Presented:

Mr. Sharif Shaikh, the advocate representing Shettiyar, argued that his client was falsely implicated in the case. He presented an air ticket as evidence, demonstrating that Shettiyar was in Coimbatore at the time of the incident on May 7, 2022. He emphasized that Shettiyar was not present at the scene and was ready to comply with any conditions imposed by the court.

Ms. Ratnavali Patil, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) representing the State, opposed the bail application. She argued that Shettiyar had instigated the assault and was a member of a crime syndicate, thus posing a potential threat if released.

Court’s Reasoning and Decision:

After reviewing the submissions and the documents on record, Judge Kulkarni noted the significant discrepancy between the prosecution’s claims and the presented evidence. He highlighted that Shettiyar’s name was not mentioned in the initial FIR and that the air ticket provided a credible alibi.

“In the FIR there is no name of applicant,” Judge Kulkarni stated in his oral order. “As per the copy of air ticket filed on record, it revealed that during period of incident applicant was not present on the spot.”

The court also considered that there was no apparent need for custodial interrogation of Shettiyar.

“Therefore, merely on the allegation of informant and without requirement of any custodial interrogation, he cannot be detained for indefinite period,” the judge observed. “Therefore, I am of the opinion that for the purpose of further investigation, presence of applicant is not required by police.”

Consequently, the court granted bail to Rajesh Raju Shettiyar, ordering his release upon furnishing a Personal Recognizance (PR) bond of Rs. 25,000 along with one or two sureties of the same amount.

The court imposed several conditions, including that Shettiyar must attend Crime Branch, Unit V, when summoned by the Investigating Officer, provide his residential address proof and contact numbers, refrain from influencing witnesses, and not leave India without the court’s permission.

Implications and Significance:

This ruling underscores the importance of alibi evidence and the absence of direct mention in the FIR when considering bail applications. The court’s decision emphasizes that mere allegations are insufficient grounds for prolonged detention, particularly when credible evidence suggests the accused’s absence from the crime scene.

The case highlights the judiciary’s commitment to upholding individual liberty while ensuring that investigations are conducted fairly and thoroughly. The decision serves as a reminder that the prosecution must present substantial evidence to justify the continued detention of an accused person.

The order was dictated, transcribed, and signed on July 18, 2022, and uploaded on July 19, 2022, at 4:30 p.m.