Thane: The Thane Sessions Court has granted bail to a Kalwa-based man arrested in a sensational murder case, on the grounds that the police failed to communicate the reasons for his arrest—a fundamental constitutional right.
The bail application was argued solely on the ground that the accused was not informed of the “grounds of arrest” at the time of his detention, thereby violating his constitutional and statutory rights. In the absence of this mandatory procedural compliance, the court granted him bail.
The case pertains to the shocking murder of 23-year-old Mansi Bhoir, who was allegedly pushed off the Majiwada-Kalwa Bridge in November 2023. According to police, the incident occurred after Bhoir resisted her boyfriend Aadil Shaikh’s demand to enter into a sexual relationship.
Enraged, Aadil allegedly pushed her off the bridge. Bhoir initially struck a pillar and fell unconscious. Aadil then allegedly called two of his friends—Mehboob Makdum Ali Sheikh (28) and Roopesh Shivkumar Yadav alias Sonu (23)—to assist him in pushing her body into the creek.
All three accused were arrested in 2024, and a chargesheet was filed against them. Each of the accused was served with an intimation letter dated November 10, 2024.
The bail plea focused on a technical but critical lapse: the failure of the arresting officers to inform the accused of the grounds of arrest. Section 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) mandates that any person arrested must be informed of the reasons for their arrest and their right to bail. This communication must be immediate and, ideally, in writing—especially if the arrest is made without a warrant for a non-bailable offense.
In the bail application, the accused argued: “When any accused is produced before the Court and his custody is handed over for investigation in another case, the requirement of communicating the grounds of arrest in writing does not cease. Therefore, even if the accused was in magisterial custody in one case and his custody was taken in another as per a court order, it was mandatory for the Investigating Officer to communicate the grounds of arrest in writing.”
In its order, the court observed: “It appears that the Investigating Officer did not communicate the specific details that necessitated the arrest of all accused. Considering the judgments cited by the defense counsel and the intimation letter filed with the chargesheet by the prosecution, it is evident that the Investigating Officer failed to comply with Section 50 of CrPC (now Section 47 of BNSS, 2023) by not informing the accused of the grounds of arrest. Therefore, on this ground, all accused are entitled to be released on bail.”
