The Bombay High Court has rejected a criminal revision application challenging the cancellation of bail granted to a person who was below 18 years of age when a fatal road accident occurred in Mumbai. The Court noted the allegations concerning dangerous driving and stunt activities and upheld the order cancelling his bail.
Justice Shivkumar Dige passed the order on September 9, 2026, in Criminal Revision Application No. 396 of 2026.
Background Of The Case
According to the prosecution, the incident took place on February 5, 2026. The applicant was alleged to have driven his father's car rashly, negligently and at excessive speed before hitting a motorcyclist. The motorcyclist later died during treatment, while the other victim suffered permanent disability. At the time of the incident, the applicant was 17 years and 8 months old.
The Juvenile Justice Board had granted him bail. The order was subsequently challenged before the Sessions Court, which cancelled the bail. The applicant then approached the High Court.
His counsel submitted that the incident had occurred suddenly, that he had no intention to cause the collision, and that he had cooperated with the investigation. It was also submitted that the investigation was complete, the charge sheet had been filed and the applicant was attending college and proceedings before the Juvenile Justice Board.
Court's Observations
The prosecution and the victim's counsel relied upon material concerning stunt videos allegedly posted on Instagram. The High Court noted that screenshots placed on record showed the applicant performing dangerous activities involving cars and two-wheelers, including driving with persons positioned on the bonnet and windshield and riding a scooter with two pillion riders without helmets.
The Court also considered the allegation that the applicant's parents were aware of these activities but had not been able to control them.
" It shows that Applicant 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."
The Court further noted that the applicant had been below the lawful driving age when he was allegedly driving two-wheelers and four-wheelers on public roads. It also took note of the fact that, after his release on bail, he was reportedly not found at the address where he was required to stay.
The High Court also considered the prosecution's submission that stunt videos had subsequently been deleted from the Instagram account and that a friend of the applicant had been charged in connection with the alleged destruction of evidence.
Decision
Justice Shivkumar Dige held that the Sessions Court had passed a well-reasoned order and found no ground to interfere with it. The Court distinguished the judgments relied upon by the applicant, observing that their facts were different from the present case.
The Court accordingly concluded that there was no merit in the revision application and rejected Criminal Revision Application No. 396 of 2026.
