The Designated Court under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (MPID) Act, City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai, granted regular bail to the applicant, Nilesh Shivaji Barve, in an oral order dated May 7th, 2024. The application, Bail Application No. 1178 of 2024, was filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in connection with C.R. No. 74 of 2024 registered at Kanjur Marg Police Station for offenses including Sections 325 (Voluntarily causing grievous hurt), 326 (Voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means), and 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) read with Section 34 of the IPC. The court, presided over by Judge Aditee Uday Kadam, found sufficient grounds to release the applicant, relying heavily on the principle of parity with co-accused and the completion of the investigation.
The Prosecution’s Case: Quarrel and Assault with a Beer Bottle
The case stems from a complaint lodged by an informant residing in a society at Kanjur Marg. The dispute arose because the applicant, a delivery boy, and other individuals allegedly used to gather near the society gate to drink liquor. This habit led to frequent calls to the police by society members, creating grudge among the accused who often abused the members without reason.
The specific incident occurred on March 25th, 2024, when a quarrel broke out between the informant and the accused, including Nilesh Barve. The prosecution alleged that the accused assaulted and abused the informant. The informant was beaten up with a beer bottle, sustaining a bleeding injury. Additionally, the informant’s son also sustained injury because the applicant allegedly took a bite of him. Consequently, charges for grievous hurt were leveled against the group.
Judicial Analysis: Parity, Custody, and Missing Evidence
The court considered the arguments from the applicant’s counsel, Ld. Advocate Runal Watulkar, and the Ld. SPP Seema Deshpande. The defense highlighted that the applicant was the sole bread earner for his family and had no criminal antecedents. The prosecution opposed the bail, but the court found several facts compelling enough to grant relief:
- Parity with Co-Accused: The most decisive factor was that other two accused persons in the crime were already released on bail. The court determined that, on the ground of parity, the applicant was also entitled to bail.
- Investigation Completed: The court noted that the Investigation is complete and the charge-sheet has been filed. This finding rendered the applicant’s physical custody unnecessary for custodial interrogation.
- No Formal Proof of Injury: The court made a specific observation that the Investigating Agency had not produced the injury certificate on record to prima facie justify the charges of Section 325 or 326 of the IPC against the accused at this stage.
- No Discovery Remaining: The applicant had been in custody since April 24th, 2024, and the court noted there was “no recovery or discovery as such remain” from him.
Considering these aspects—the completion of the probe, the principle of parity, and the lack of immediate documentary proof of grievous hurt on record—the court determined that the application should be allowed with stringent conditions.
Strict Conditions for Release
The Bail Application No. 1178 of 2024 was allowed. Nilesh Shivaji Barve was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a P.R. Bond of ₹50,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.
The following strict conditions were imposed to secure the prosecution’s interest and the safety of the informant:
- No-Entry Restriction: The applicant is directed not to enter the area / vicinity where the informant / injured resides till the end of the trial. This condition directly addresses the pre-existing tensions in the society.
- Police Reporting: The applicant must mark his presence at the concerned police station on every Saturday and Sunday in between 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. for a period of two months from the date of the order.
- Provisional Cash Bail: The applicant was permitted to furnish a provisional cash bail of ₹50,000/- for a period of three months, granting him time to arrange for the formal surety.
- No Tampering: He is directed not to tamper with the prosecution evidence or pressurize the prosecution witnesses in any manner.
This order balances the seriousness of the assault allegations with the accused’s right to liberty, especially when the investigation is complete and co-accused have already been released.