Click the Play button to listen to article

The Bombay High Court recently while upholding the bail cancellation of a minor boy, a prime accused in the Ghatkopar hit-and-run case, noted that he was not under 'parental control' but in company of 'spoilt and affluent' children making videos of stunts etc and thus to curb such activities in society, it was important for the minor boy, who has now become an adult, to be kept in a 'reformative' home.

Single-judge Justice Shivkumar Dige noted that the Child in Conflict of Law (CCL), was 17 years and 08 months at the time of incident, which took place on February 5, this year. The judge noted that the Sessions Court while cancelling the bail granted to the CCL had made certain observations highlighting that his family offered some money to the victim to settle the matter, that the CCL was involved in the company of spoilt and affluent children and was performing illegal stunts on two wheelers and four wheelers, dangerous to the lives of other persons.

In the instant case, the judge noted that while the CCL - Uttam Bhushan alias Uttam Patel was negligently driving an SUV Car, without a valid driving licence, he rammed his car in a Scooty driven by one Dhrumil Premji Patel, who died during treatment and his wife Minal Patel was paralysed completely.  

"The record shows that CCL not only put the health and safety of himself, but also of others, at risk, and he was in the habit of boasting about his acts. His parents were aware of the said acts, but they did not take any efforts to control the act of the CCL. Resultantly, one person has lost his life and other became completely paralysed without any fault on their part. The CCL was driving the two-wheeler and four-wheeler vehicle before attaining the age of 18, which is the lawful age for driving a vehicle, and he was driving them on the road precariously, which would have caused danger to the general public, who were not at fault. It shows that parents of the CCL have no control over his activities. At the time of the incident, the CCL was 17 years and 8 months' old. It was as good as being 18 years of age. It is necessary to curb such activities, which spoil children and causes threat to the society. Though he is a student, keeping him in a reformative home would make him understand gravity of his act," Justice Dige observed.

The judge noted that the CCL was in the habit of performing stunts on two-wheelers and four wheelers and was also posting videos of the stunts on the public Instagram page “ryankelafdebaaz”. One such video's screenshots on Instagram the said page showed him driving a car while one of his friends was lying flat on the bonnet and his other friends were hanging out of the said car without wearing seat belts. 

The judge further took into account the fact that even after granting bail, the CCL was not found to be living in Koparkhairane, Navi Mumbai, the address he had shared with the prosecution and the courts, which reflected that he hand his family had 'scant' respect for the law. 

"The same shows that the CCL was not only reckless about his own safety but also that of the others around him. The screenshot further shows the CCL riding a scooter with 2 pillion riders without any helmet and performing a wheelie with two of his friends on the pillion seat etc. The record shows that he has scant respect for the orders passed by lawful authority. Now, the CCL is a major. When he was a child, there was no parental control over him. The CCL 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 ends of justice," Justice Dige held. 

Further the judge noted that the stunt videos from the Instagram Page were deleted, which amounts to destruction of evidence, and friend of the CCL has been charged for the said offence.

Considering all these fact, the bench upheld the CCL's bail cancellation. 

Appearance: 

Advocates Jitesh Jadhav, Sushant Valimbe, Manish Singh, Abhijeet Yadav, Padmavati Vaishya and Nihal Mishra appeared for the CCL.

Advocates Atharva Dandekar, Ruben Mascarenhas, Tejas Gupta, Varad Sirsikar, Khushida Shaikh and Hitendra Parab represented the Complainant.

Additional Public Prosecutor BB Kulkarni represented the State.

Case Title: U vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Revision Application 396 of 2026)

Click Here To Read/Download Order



Tags: