The applicant was inebriated at the time of
incident. It was a dash by his vehicle to the scooty of
the deceased resulted into the death of two persons and
severely injured one child. Thus the offence ought to
have been hit and run by a drunk person within ambit
of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. The
investigating officers have not chosen to add this
offence and added Section 304A and 279 of Indian
Penal Code in order to extend helping hand to accused
to release him on bail. {Para 17}
18. However learned D.G.P. as well as informant have
brought to the notice of this Court all these intentional
lapses by the investigating agency as such, this Court
cannot be act as a mute spectator to see the foul play by
the investigating agency. Thus the judicial activism
comes into play and the intervention by the court is the
ultimate requirement of it. On face of record in the
light of submission, the prima facie case is within ambit
of Section 304 of Indian Penal Code.
19. In addition after the incident, the informant has
chosen to take the photographs as well as videos of the
incident. The applicant got annoyed and slapped to the
informant on his check and caught hold his collar. Thus
the subsequent conduct of this applicant speaks of his
arrogance toward the police officer on duty.”
8. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Ponda appearing for Applicant,
however, tried to explain the behaviour of the Applicant on the
ground that he is under medication on the ground of anxiety since
the year 2010 when his elder brother met with an accident in the
year 2010. It is tried to impress upon the Court that he was not intoxicated but due to anxiety he behaved in different manner. It is further argued that there is no evidence available on record to show that he was inebriated as no blood sample was taken.
9. The said contentions cannot be considered considering the seriousness of the offence and overall conduct and behavior of the Applicant. Moreover, it can be seen that how the Applicant is influential which he appeared to have used after the incidence and because of which in presence of police he could flee away and which is the reason for not having blood sample of the Applicant. Thus, in this matter, benefit of the fact that blood sample was not taken, cannot be given to such person.
11. In view of the above referred observations, there is every
likelihood that if the Applicant is released on bail, he may tamper
with the prosecution evidence and pressurize the witnesses. Thus, I
am not inclined to grant bail. Accordingly the application is rejected.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.3412 OF 2024
Jay Chandrahas Gharat Vs The State of Maharashtra
CORAM : ANIL S.KILOR, J.
DATE : 25th October 2024
1. Heard.
2. By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure the applicant is seeking bail in Crime No.168 of 2024
registered with Uran Police Station, Navi Mumbai, for the offences
punishable under Sections 201, 279, 304, 304(2), 338, 353, 504 of
Indian Penal Code r/w Sections 134(A), 134(B) and 184 of Motor
Vehicle Act.
3. Having gone through the charge sheet and relevant material
and most importantly the order of the Sessions Judge rejecting the
application of the Applicant for grant of bail, I am of the opinion that
this is not a fit case for grant of bail. The reasons to arrive at such a
conclusion are as follow.
4. The prosecution story is that the informant is a Railway Police
Force (RPF) constable. On 6th April 2024 he was on duty at Uran
Railway Station at 22.00 hours till 7th April 2024 at 7.00 a.m. At
about 22.48 hours he was in front of the railway station. That time
he heard the noise and seen the smoke from the road. Thus he
rushed towards the road. One girl child aged 3 years was lying on
the road in injured condition. The blood was oozing from her head.
One white Creta car bearing No.MH-46-BV-5000 was at a distance of
50 meters from the gate of the railway station. The said vehicle was
in damaged condition. One scooty bearing No.MH-43-AA-1459 was
lying adjacent to the road and it was broken into pieces. The said
Creta car dashed to the scooty. The parents of the child were lying in
injured condition. The adjoining people rushed over there.
5. The informant was standing near to the Creta car. That time
the driver of the Creata car get off from the car and rushed on his
person. He slapped to him and caught hold his coller. The Applicant
asked to the informant in vernacular “A bhosadike, ye padi huvi dead
body ko hata” and rushed on the persons present over there. The
informant came to know the name of the driver of Creta car from the
persons present over there. The informant hospitalized to the
injured child and her parents. The parents of the child died in this
incident. The girl child is presently in critical condition in Apollo
Hospital, Belapur.
6. In the backdrop of above referred prosecution story certain
facts relating to the conduct of the Applicant more particularly his
arrogance seen immediately after the incident is imperative to note.
Learned Sessions Judge in apt manner described it in his order dated
24th April 2024 while rejecting the bail application. It would be
beneficial to go through the said findings which read thus :
“9. On perusal of the recitals of FIR, it appears the
incident took place on 6.4.2024 at about 22.48 hours in
front of Uran Railway Station. The informant is a RPF
constable and he was on duty at the relevant time in
front of the railway station. The applicant was driving
the Creta car at the time of incident. The victim child is
presently aged 3 years. Her parents are died in the said
incident at the spot and their death declared by the
doctor at the hospital. The parents and the child were
on the Scooty at the time of incident. The Creta car has
given dash to the Scooty wherein parents of the child
expired and the child is in critical condition at Apollo
Hospital, CBD Belapur.
11. During course of hearing of this bail application,
the informant has played the video recorded in his
mobile at the time of incident. The said videos are
pertaining to the actual facts of the case. The said video
is played in presence of advocate of applicant, learned
D.G.P. and investigating officer in open court. On
perusal of the said videos which are put it on record in
pen drive, it is evident that it was a severe dash by the
Creta car to the scooty. It was severe damage to the
vehicle at such front portion of the Creta car was totally
damaged and the scooty was broken into the pieces. It
depicts the severity of the dash. The scooty after dash
has pushed at a long distance. The child and her
parents were lying on the ground in a critical condition
of which parents were expired at the spot.
12. The said video further disclosed presence of this
applicant inside the car. The applicant was inebriated.
After the incident, the informant immediately contacted
to the local police. The traffic police as well as police
constable from Uran Police station rushed at the spot.
The applicant came outside the vehicle and seated on a
two wheeler in presence of police and then he was
moved away from the spot. The applicant was not in a
position to walk properly while sitting on the scooty
which depicts his inebriated condition.
13. The crime is registered on 7.4.2024. Initially the
investigation of this crime is assigned to PSI Shri Amol
Khade. Subsequently the investigation of this crime is
assigned to Police Inspector (Crime) Shri Suryakant
Kamble, Uran Police Station. During course of
investigation by the first investigating officer, he drew
spot panchanama and recorded statements of the
witnesses. The subsequent investigating officer visited
Apollo Hospital and then at the hospital wherein the
applicant/accused subsequently admitted for treatment.
The first and the second investigating officer have not
chosen to collect the vital evidence of the videos from
the informant. Further the blood sample of the
applicant/accused was not collected at inception.
14. It appears as a intentional omission on the part of
both investigating offier for not collecting the above
vital and important piece of evidence. After the
incident, though the police were present at the spot, still
they have not chosen to arrest the accused and allowed
him to flee away from the spot. Thus, it shows
reluctance on the part of the police since inception of
the incident.
15. After the incident during night on 6.4.2024, then
this applicant has chosen to admit himself in a private
hospital on 10.4.2024 in order to move this application
for pre-arrest bail which is filed on 15-4-2024 in order
to crave sympathy of the court. This court by virtue of
order dated 16-4-2024 granted interim protection to the
applicant in the light of submission on behalf of learned
advocate of applicant and next date of hearing is listed
today. The applicant was directed to attend the police
station on every third Sunday. Astonishingly, the
applicant got the discharge on the third Sunday i.e. on
21.4.2024 and attended to the police station on
22.4.2024. Thus the stand taken by the applicant of his
surgery of nose post incident was nothing but attempt
to create empathy for grant of pre-arrest bail.
17. The applicant was inebriated at the time of
incident. It was a dash by his vehicle to the scooty of
the deceased resulted into the death of two persons and
severely injured one child. Thus the offence ought to
have been hit and run by a drunk person within ambit
of Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. The
investigating officers have not chosen to add this
offence and added Section 304A and 279 of Indian
Penal Code in order to extend helping hand to accused
to release him on bail.
18. However learned D.G.P. as well as informant have
brought to the notice of this Court all these intentional
lapses by the investigating agency as such, this Court
cannot be act as a mute spectator to see the foul play by
the investigating agency. Thus the judicial activism
comes into play and the intervention by the court is the
ultimate requirement of it. On face of record in the
light of submission, the prima facie case is within ambit
of Section 304 of Indian Penal Code.
19. In addition after the incident, the informant has
chosen to take the photographs as well as videos of the
incident. The applicant got annoyed and slapped to the
informant on his check and caught hold his collar. Thus
the subsequent conduct of this applicant speaks of his
arrogance toward the police officer on duty.”
7. Learned Sessions Judge in view of the above referred
observations while rejecting the anticipatory bail application moved
by the Applicant forwarded a copy to Commissioner of Police, Navi
Mumbai, for appropriate action against both the Investigating
Officers namely PSI Shri Amol Khade and Police Inspector Shri
Suryakant Kamble for intentional lapses as observed in his order as
well as action against police from Uran Police Station and the traffic
police who allowed the accused to run away from the spot.
8. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Ponda appearing for Applicant,
however, tried to explain the behaviour of the Applicant on the
ground that he is under medication on the ground of anxiety since
the year 2010 when his elder brother met with an accident in the
year 2010. It is tried to impress upon the Court that he was not
intoxicated but due to anxiety he behaved in different manner. It is
further argued that there is no evidence available on record to show
that he was inebriated as no blood sample was taken.
9. The said contentions cannot be considered considering the
seriousness of the offence and overall conduct and behaviour of the
Applicant. Moreover, it can be seen that how the Applicant is
influential which he appeared to have used after the incidence and
because of which in presence of police he could flee away and which
is the reason for not having blood sample of the Applicant. Thus, in
this matter, benefit of the fact that blood sample was not taken,
cannot be given to such person.
10. It is pointed out that family of the Applicant has spent lakhs of
rupees for the treatment of the injured girl. No doubt such an
approach towards injured girl is appreciable, but it will not help to
wash out grave illegalities and inhumane behaviour and approach
shown by the Applicant immediately after the incident.
11. In view of the above referred observations, there is every
likelihood that if the Applicant is released on bail, he may tamper
with the prosecution evidence and pressurize the witnesses. Thus, I
am not inclined to grant bail. Accordingly the application is rejected.
12. The Commissioner of Police, Navi Mumbai, shall produce a
copy of inquiry, if any, made and action taken against P.S.I. Shri Amol
Khade and Police Inspector Shri Suryakant Kamble, and against the
police from Uram Police Station and Traffic Police who rushed at the
spot allowing the accused to flee from the spot, as directed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel vide order dated 24th April 2024.
13. The Registry to communicate this order to the Commissioner
of Police, Navi Mumbai, and seek compliance by 12th November
2024.
14. Place this matter before the Court on 13th November 2024.
(ANIL S.KILOR, J.)
No comments:
Post a Comment