The Bombay High Court has approved bail for a 23-year-old individual accused of stabbing his friend following a heated argument at his bachelor party. Justice Prithviraj Chavan concluded that at first glance, the case seems to constitute culpable homicide not amounting to murder, falling under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Bombay High Court has extended bail to a 23-year-old man implicated in a grave incident that led to the death of Shivam Yadav. The case, stemming from a violent altercation that resulted in a stabbing, has been under the microscope due to its complex nature and the young age of the accused, Arjun Yadav.
The incident, which unfolded on April 7, 2022, has been a subject of intense scrutiny. It occurred during a gathering organized by the accused to celebrate his impending nuptials. What started as a festive occasion quickly descended into chaos following excessive alcohol consumption, leading to a heated dispute and the tragic outcome.
Justice Prithviraj Chavan of the Bombay High Court, in his deliberation, highlighted that the case seemed to align more with “culpable homicide not amounting to murder” rather than premeditated murder. This distinction is crucial in the legal realm as it significantly influences the nature of the charges and the corresponding legal repercussions.
The court’s decision to grant bail was influenced by several factors. Notably, the accused had no previous criminal record, and the ongoing trial is not expected to conclude in the near future. These elements, combined with the circumstances surrounding the incident, led to the judicial conclusion that bail was a reasonable measure.
The defense, led by lawyer Sana Raees Khan, presented a narrative suggesting that the fatal incident was not a result of a preconceived plan but rather an impulsive act spurred by “grave and sudden provocation.” This argument, along with the assertion that the maximum sentence for culpable homicide not amounting to murder is ten years of rigorous imprisonment, played a pivotal role in the court’s decision.
However, the prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor A A Palkar, maintained a stance of caution. While acknowledging that the accused might have been aware of the lethal potential of the weapon and the critical nature of the injury inflicted, they argued that this did not necessarily equate to an intent to kill.
In the end, the High Court granted bail to Arjun Yadav against a personal recognizance bond of Rs 15,000, underlining that this decision should not be interpreted as a reflection on the merits of the case.
This case underscores the complexities inherent in legal proceedings, especially when they involve young individuals and the thin lines between different classifications of homicide. The Bombay High Court’s decision brings to light the nuanced considerations that courts must balance in determining bail, reflecting the multifaceted nature of justice and legal responsibility in contemporary society.
Also Read- [NDPS ACT] Delhi High Court Grants Parole Of Three Weeks (lawchakra.in)
