The Court of City Civil and Sessions for Greater Bombay granted regular bail to Sushil Hamir Sutar, an applicant accused in a robbery and house-trespass case, despite the prosecution’s evidence pointing to his active involvement at the crime scene. The order, delivered by Additional Sessions Judge Shri N. P. Tribhuwan on March 14, 2024, in Criminal Bail Application No. 613 of 2024, balanced the seriousness of the charges with factors such as the nature of the victim’s injuries, the lack of weapon use, and the applicant’s personal circumstances. Sutar was arrested in connection with Crime No. 120/2024 registered with the V. P. Road Police Station for offenses punishable under Sections 448 (House-trespass), 395 (Dacoity), and 323 (Voluntarily causing hurt) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The decision highlighted a pragmatic approach, concluding that further custody was unnecessary given the status of the investigation and the minimal risk posed by the accused.
Allegations of Dacoity and Physical Assault
The prosecution’s case, based on the complaint of Dipesh Motilal Shah, detailed a terrifying incident of house-trespass and robbery. On February 22, 2024, at about 9:15 PM, five unknown persons, allegedly from Rajasthan, forcefully entered the informant’s residence. The informant was confronted, and one of the intruders demanded money, claiming they had come from Rajasthan. During the incident, the informant’s mother was assaulted—her hair was caught, a mobile phone was snatched, and an attempt was made to place a cloth over her mouth. The informant himself was beaten by three of the assailants using their hands. The commotion eventually drew the attention of the chawl residents, prompting the five intruders to flee. The informant managed to catch the applicant, Sushil Hamir Sutar, and the residents apprehended a second person, while the remaining three, whose names were subsequently disclosed, successfully absconded with the complainant’s mother’s mobile phone. Both the complainant and his mother sustained injuries to their hands.
Key Arguments: Humanitarian Grounds and Investigative Status
Ld. Advocate Mr. Shailesh S. Kharat, representing the applicant, presented several factors favoring bail. Notably, he pleaded for bail on humanitarian grounds, informing the Court that the applicant was scheduled to be married on March 17, 2024, and submitted the wedding card as Exhibit 3. Regarding the investigation, the defense argued that Sutar was arrested on February 23, 2024, had completed his police custody, and was in judicial custody since March 1, 2024. The counsel asserted that most of the investigation was complete, the applicant was thoroughly interrogated, and nothing further was recoverable from him, as the stolen articles had already been seized by the Investigating Officer.
The Ld. APP, Mrs. Ranjana Budhwant, opposed the application, stressing the seriousness of the offense of dacoity (Section 395 IPC), which is punishable with up to ten years of imprisonment. She argued that Sutar was caught red-handed at the spot while committing the offense, backed by evidence from CCTV footage and direct eye-witness testimony from the victims and chawl residents. The prosecution expressed concern that if released, the accused, being a resident of Rajasthan, would not remain present during the trial, especially since one co-accused, Vikas, was still absconding.
Court’s Finding on Injury and Custody Necessity
In evaluating the case, the Additional Sessions Judge acknowledged that the applicant played an “active role in commission of the crime.” However, the Court weighed this against several mitigating circumstances. Despite the serious charges, the prosecution “have not made it clear whether they have sustained simple or grievous hurt,” suggesting the injuries were not severe. Importantly, the accused persons “have not used the weapon while committing the offence.” Considering the applicant had already spent nearly a month in custody and had no criminal antecedents, the Court concluded that “further custody of applicant is not necessary.” These factors, combined with the pending marriage date, led the Judge to rule that Sutar could be admitted to bail by imposing strict conditions to safeguard the prosecution’s interests.
The Court allowed Criminal Bail Application No. 613 of 2024, ordering Sushil Hamir Sutar to be released on bail upon executing a Personal Bond for Rs. 25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount. To mitigate the risk of flight and tampering, the Court imposed stringent conditions: Sutar must co-operate with the investigation, not tamper with any prosecution witnesses, and remain present at the concerned Police Station on every alternate Thursday between 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. for a period of 3 months or until the charge-sheet is filed, whichever is earlier. He is also required to furnish his detailed address and mobile number to both the Investigating Officer and the concerned Court.