“It is widely recognised that younger the age of the offender, the lesser is its culpability” - Justice Milind Jadhav

The Bombay High Court has granted bail to a 22-year-old son who was charged with the murder of his 69-year-old "bedridden" father.

Single Judge Bench of Justice Milind Jadhav of Bombay High Court noted that the Applicant's adolescent mind was unable to cope with the continuous abuse that he and his mother underwent at the hands of the deceased father, and at the time of commission of crime, he was significantly provoked by the deceased. The Applicant was a 20-year-old student pursuing a Bachelor of Management Studies from a reputed college at the time of incident and, for the last two years, is incarcerated.

On February 22, 2023, the Applicant after returning from college in the afternoon, assisted his father in passing urine due to kidney ailment. Later in the evening, the father asked for a glass of water to take some unprescribed medications. The mere refusal of the Applicant to do so led the father to abuse him and his mother, which escalated into an altercation. The judge noted that initially, the Applicant asked his father to 'shut up' but the abuses continued, and then he took a millstone and gave two-three blows on his father's head. Still, the abuses continued, and therefore, the son took a kitchen knife and stabbed it in his father's neck. Thereafter, the son confessed to the commission of the crime at the nearest police station.

The bench primarily emphasized that one must take into account the ‘deleterious effect’ of the abuse caused on the mind of the Applicant which led to gruesome retaliation after being provoked.

‘Taking an overall view as to how the incident may have transpired from the available material on record, I am prima facie of the opinion that the situation leading to the ultimate assault was a result of grave provocation because of the precursor incidents concerning victim hurling a repeated barrage of abuses not only on the Applicant but also his mother, which could not be handled by the Applicant's 20-year-old adolescent mind at that stage.’ the court observed.

The bench also stated that whenever any punishment is levied upon a young offender, his exclusion from the normal educational stream of a period of time brings about unpleasant consequences and harm, which adds a layer of punishment over and above what a non-student accused may be subjected to. The court also emphasized that while dealing with young offenders, every attempt is to be made to promote reformation, which leads to rehabilitation of the offender.

‘The Applicant before me has admitted the act by himself walking to the Police Station giving information to the Police. He could have even run away had he been of a different criminal tendency. At this stage, I am not considering its evidentiary value. The confessional statement when read would show that the Petitioner is contrite. He is a young adult offender. It is widely recognised that younger the age of the offender, the lesser is its culpability. Therefore, having regard to the totality of the circumstances before me at this stage, on prima facie consideration I am inclined to consider the Applicant’s case.’ held the court.

Thus, after due consideration, the court granted bail to the Applicant.

Case Title: Tejas Shamsunder Shinde v. The State of Maharashtra (Bail Application 544 of 2024)

Advocate for the Applicant: Ms. Aruna Pai

Advocate for the Respondent: Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Mahalakshmi Ganapathy