The Bombay High Court recently while quashing a First Information Report (FIR) lodged against a 'young man' for 'brandishing' a sword in a neighbourhood quarrel, held that Courts must give an opportunity to such young accused persons for their reformation and rehabilitation.

The High Court also imposed a cost of Rs 10,000 on the young man to 'give out a strong message' to the young citizens of the country not to take law in their own hands. 

Single-judge Justice Milind Jadhav noted that the applicant before him had received a job in an international shipping company and thus, considered quashing the FIR especially after noting that the applicant had only brandished the sword, which he received as an 'award' and did not hurt any of 15 to 20 persons, who had barged into his house. 

The judge noted that the incident took place in 2014, when the applicant was a Class XII student and that now he has become a 'grown up' man. The judge hoped that the applicant's family will do their duty to reform the applicant and make him lead a 'reformed' life. 

"However on the flip side, if a chance is given to the Applicant because of his young age, there is a possibility that he will be remorseful and repent in retrospect about his unwarranted action. This is a chance required to be taken by the Court because punishment has to be believed to be inflicted for a reformative result rather than being punitive in nature. Court feels that reform and rehabilitation of the such young accused person needs to be considered especially when age of the accused is young so that the accused gets an opportunity / or is given an opportunity to reform, rehabilitate and earn his livelihood honorably from the perspective of social integration. The Court must consider the young age of accused. If the Applicant is made to languish in jail or face the trial further, there is every possibility that he might lose faith in the institution and society at large and may tread the path of criminality or would waste his life," Justice Jadhav observed. 

The judge however, cautioned young offenders and said that a strong message must be sent to the country's youth to ensure not to take law in their own hands. The bench therefore, imposed costs of Rs 10,000 to be paid to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa Advocates Aid Fund. 

"In view of the act of the Applicant of brandishing the sword, a message also needs to be given to the youth of this country that they will not take the law into their hands by brandishing a weapon (in this case a sword which he had received as an award and was displayed inside his house on the wall) which is considered to be a dangerous weapon, lest in a situation that may eventually arise, it may end up causing physical and bodily harm to somebody. In that view of the matter, I direct the Applicant to pay costs of Rs 10,000 which shall be paid by his father who is present in Court and who agrees to pay the same to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa Advocate Aid Fund," the judge emphasised. 

Prolonged trials, the judge opined, exposes many youth to abuse and that because of this very, any and every semblance of a chance towards a reformative approach should be adopted, especially in the case of young offenders like the applicant. Thus, the courts must take every opportunity or the risk, constructively in the case of young offenders and they should be given an opportunity to become a good citizen in the Society.

"This Court or rather the prosecution cannot come in the way of resurrecting the life of the Applicant who is admittedly an young offender and had unfortunately found himself in a situation on the fateful day of the incident. There are no antecedents. Applicant is an educated person. He has no motive to indulge in any untoward act. There is no premeditation and planning. Applicant found himself in a situation where he tried to protect himself. I am of the clear opinion that present Criminal Application therefore deserves to be allowed and granted," the judge said while quashing the FIR. 

With these observations, the bench quashed the FIR.

Appearance:

Advocates Yayatri Nayak, Lubdha Bhoir, Akash Tayade, Vinit Dotre, Raj Gupta and Rajesh Khobragade appeared for the Applicant.

Additional Public Prosecutor RV Newton represented State.

Case Title: YRK vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Application 1466 of 2026)

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 405

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment