The Bombay High Court last week upheld a Sessions Court order cancelling the bail granted by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) to a then 17-year-old boy in the Ghatkopar crash case, saying that the 17-year-old may again indulge in stunts if he’s released on bail. The boy was allegedly driving an SUV when he rammed into a bike, killing 33-year-old Ghatkopar businessman Dhrumil Patel and injuring his wife earlier this year.

A single-judge bench of Justice Shivkumar G Dige observed that the applicant had attained majority and may again indulge in a “stunt act with his friends, causing danger to others” if released on bail. The HC, on September 9, rejected the criminal revision application filed by the juvenile accused against the Sessions Court order.

The applicant, a Class 12 student who was 17 years and eight months old at the time of the February 5 incident, claimed he had no intention of hitting the couple’s bike. Seeking relief on the grounds of his age, completion of the investigation and filing of the chargesheet, and having spent 10 days in an observation home, the plea argued that “no purpose will be served keeping him in observation home.”

Story continues below.
Subscribe to see fewer ads.

Additional Public Prosecutor Balraj B Kulkarni, appearing for the police, along with advocates Atharva Dandekar, Ruben Mascarenhas and Tejas Gupta, appearing for the victim, opposed the plea. They argued that the applicant habitually performed stunts in vehicles on public roads and uploaded videos on social media, which he later deleted, amounting to destruction of evidence.

Justice Dige found “no infirmity” in the Sessions Court order, which observed that releasing the applicant within a short period, despite his involvement in the “company of spoilt and affluent children” performing stunts on two- and four-wheelers, “would undermine the confidence of society.”

“It is necessary to curb such activities…Though he is a student, keeping him in a reformative home would make him understand gravity of his act,” the HC noted.

It observed that the police’s inability to find him at the Navi Mumbai residence where he was supposed to reside under his earlier bail conditions showed his “scant respect” for court orders.

Story continues below this ad

“Applicant would be exposed to moral, physical and psychological danger due to lack of parental control. He may again indulge in stunt act with his friends, causing danger to others. It will defeat the ends of justice,” the HC noted, upholding the Sessions Court’s “well-reasoned” order.