Court Cites Weak Evidence, Balances Liberty with Accountability
In a noteworthy legal development, the Bombay High Court has granted anticipatory bail to Mr. Dilip Khedkar, father of suspended IAS officer Ms. Puja Khedkar, in a criminal case linked to an alleged road rage and kidnapping incident in Navi Mumbai. The order, delivered by Justice N.R. Borkar, highlights the court’s attempt to strike a balance between individual freedom and victim restitution.
₹5 Lakh Compensation Made Part of Bail Condition
The High Court’s decision includes a financial component as a precondition for bail — ₹4 lakh to be paid to the alleged victim and ₹1 lakh to the Police Welfare Fund. This approach, combining monetary restitution with pre-arrest protection, underscores the judiciary’s growing emphasis on compensatory justice alongside criminal adjudication.
Background: Road Rage Incident Leads to Abduction Allegations
The case dates back to September 2024, when a complaint was filed by Mr. Vilas Dhengare, a transport company owner. According to the FIR, a collision occurred between Mr. Khedkar’s vehicle and a concrete mixer truck driven by Mr. Chandkumar Chavan on the Mulund-Airoli Road. Following the crash, it was alleged that Mr. Pralhad Kumar, a helper on the truck, was taken away in Khedkar’s car under the pretext of being escorted to the police station.
When Mr. Kumar failed to return or answer calls, his associates searched multiple police stations before formally filing a missing person complaint, which later evolved into charges of kidnapping and assault.
Police Investigation and Tracing of Vehicle
The Navi Mumbai Police traced the vehicle to Khedkar’s Pune residence, confirming its registration details. This discovery helped investigators build the initial chain of evidence and eventually led to the anticipatory bail plea before the High Court.
Please Read Also: Maharashtra: Secretariat Gets Its 1st IFS: Rajesh Gawande Posted as Secy, Protocol, FDI, & Diaspora Affairs
Defence Refutes Allegations as “Fabricated and Misleading”
Represented by Advocates Ashok Mundargi, Abhishek Yende, Heanike Vyas, and Shubham Kahite, the defence maintained that the accusations were exaggerated and politically motivated. They asserted that the truck helper accompanied Mr. Khedkar willingly to assess the damage caused by the accident.
They further claimed that Mr. Khedkar had offered the man shelter overnight due to poor visibility and late-night circumstances, and that he dropped him at a Pune bus stop the following morning. The defence dismissed the kidnapping claims as unsupported by factual or medical evidence.
Prosecution Highlights Injury Claims, Seeks Bail Denial
Opposing the plea, Additional Public Prosecutor Ranjana Humbane urged the court to deny bail, arguing that the victim had suffered injuries while allegedly in the accused’s custody. She also cautioned that granting bail could risk witness intimidation and tampering with key evidence.
Court Weighs Liberty and Justice, Grants Conditional Bail
After hearing both sides, the High Court observed that the prosecution’s evidence lacked sufficient direct proof linking Mr. Khedkar to coercive acts. The bench emphasized that while allegations were serious, they did not warrant custodial interrogation at this stage.
However, the court reinforced financial accountability by making compensation an integral condition of anticipatory bail, signalling that justice must include restitution, not just retribution.
Broader Implications
This verdict may serve as a benchmark for future anticipatory bail cases, especially those involving alleged physical harm where compensatory relief is considered alongside procedural fairness. Legal experts believe it reflects a progressive interpretation of criminal jurisprudence — one that balances the rights of the accused with tangible relief for victims.
