Supreme Court Upholds Cancellation Of Bail Granted To Man Accused Of Assaulting, Causing Miscarriage Of Nightclub Employee

The Supreme Court recently rejected a plea challenging Bombay High Court's order cancelling bail granted to a man accused of assaulting a nightclub woman employee in a lift and causing her miscarriage.

The Court noted that the bail was granted to the accused on technical grounds, even though he applied for it on merits. It asked the accused to surrender within 1 week and apply for bail on merits before the trial court, if so advised.

A bench of CJI Surya Kant, Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice AG Masih passed the order, after hearing Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave (for the petitioner-accused).

"Go surrender and apply for bail on merits. High Court notes that you had applied for bail on merits also, but trial Court granted bail only on technical grounds, which were completely funny and absurd. Therefore, High Court has rightly [intervened]", said the CJI.

During the hearing, Dave prayed that the trial court be asked to consider the petitioner's case without his surrendering. However, the bench declined to order so. When the CJI remarked, "You hurt a pregnant woman...", the senior counsel countered that it was a case of extortion and the woman's sister-in-law had made several calls to the petitioner demanding Rs.10 crores and threatening that he would not get bail.

On this, the CJI responded, "That we do not know. You go to club late night, and this is what you do there...". Ultimately, the bench held that the conclusions drawn by the High Court were legally correct. The order was dictated thus,

"The Sessions Court committed a patent error in entertaining these grounds and allowing the bail application of the petitioner. We find that the High Court has noticed, and rightly so, that the petitioner's prayer for bail on merits was not considered by the Sessions Court.

(i) The petitioner, if so advised, may surrender within 1 week as directed by the High Court;

(ii) Thereafter, he may apply for release on bail on merits before Sessions Court. Such application shall be considered on its own merits, without being influenced by the judgment of the High Court or the fact that we have declined to entertain the instant special leave petition;

(iii) The Sessions Court is directed to decide the bail application expeditiously, and preferably, within 1 week."

Briefly put, the case pertained to a woman working as a Guest Relations Manager in a Mumbai club. On November 15, when she took a lift after completing her shift at 1.30 am, she was allegedly assaulted by the petitioner, who was accompanied by 2 other men and 1 woman. As per claims, the petitioner was in an inebriated condition and inappropriately pointed laser torch at her. When she objected to the same, he abused her and hit her on the head with the torch. Another man attempted to hit her with a liquor bottle. She called on the accused to stop hitting her as she was pregnant, but he paid no heed and hit her stomach.

After some bouncers intervened, the victim was taken to a hospital, where she found out about her miscarriage. At the time, she was in her 8th week of pregnancy.

In this backdrop, an FIR was registered against the petitioner. The Sessions Court released him on regular bail on grounds of non-compliance by police with Sections 35(3) and 48 of BNSS. In appeal, the High Court cancelled his bail, noting that the trial Court granted the same on technical grounds, even though the petitioner had sought the relief on merits. Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court.

Case Title: RHYTHM ARVIND GOYAL v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, SLP(Crl) No. 21199/2025