Gujarat HC Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Chopping Son's Body, Says Act Appears To Be Done Out Of 'Sheer Frustration Not Criminal Mindset'

The Gujarat High Court granted regular bail to the 64-year-old father accused of murdering his son, chopping his body parts and packing it in polythene bags noting that the father has been in custody since July 2022 and the alleged act prima facie appears to be out of “sheer frustration” rather than a criminal mindset.

The Court observed the record indicated that the father “must have been fed up with the conduct of his son” as the deceased son "fell prey to several vices including drugs and alcohol", was unemployed and would demand money from the father. It also took note of neighbours' statements that indicated that there used to be frequent quarrels between the father and the deceased son. 

Though the court observed that the case brought “extraordinary and unprecedented circumstances" before the court wherein the father had allegedly brutally killed his son; while on first blush the incident appeared to be a ghastly act but after perusal of the material on record, the Court was compelled to have a "second thought".

Justice M.R. Mengdey in its order observed:

“…The act alleged on part of the present Applicant prima facie appears to be an act out of sheer frustration. The age of the Applicant is 64 Years and is in custody since July 2022. The act alleged against the Applicant does not appear to be the result of a criminal mindset of the Applicant. Considering these aspects as well as the facts and circumstances of the case, the Application deserves consideration. This court has also considered the following aspects: (a) As per catena of decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court, there are mainly 3 factors which are required to be considered by this court i.e. prima facie case, availability of Applicant accused at the time of trial and tampering and hampering with the witnesses by the accused. (b) That the learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that the Applicant Accused is not likely to flee away. (c) That the Applicant is in custody since 24.07.2022. (d) The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra v. C.B.I. Reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40.”

Background

The FIR was registered against the father for the offences under Sections 302 (punishment for murder), 201 (Causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender )of the IPC and 135 (Penalty for contravention of rules or directions issued by police) of the Gujarat Police Act.

The Counsel for the father argued that the investigation is complete and chargesheet has been filed, the 64-year-old father is in custody since July 24, 2022. He then contended that father lived with his son in Ahmedabad and the rest of the family is settled abroad. He said that the son was addicted to drugs and alcohol, frequently demanded money and in support of the witness statement of the neighbours.He submitted that the son frequently quarrelled with his father over the money. He further argued that being fed up with the son's conduct, the act in question was committed. He then contended that the trial may take long and given his prolonged incarnation, age and good reputation in the society, the counsel urged the Court to release the father on bail emphasizing that he would abide by all the conditions of the Court.

The Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) opposed the bail application contending that the alleged offence has been conducted in a well-planned manner as the father purchased chopper, polythene bags from the market to commit the offence wherein, he backed the body parts of the deceased son after the incident. The APP then argued that the act is not out of frustration but a well-planned murder and the Court should dismiss the bail application.

Findings

The Court after pursuing the records and arguments of the Counsels noted that the investigation is over and the chargesheet has been filed. 

The Court then noted the applicant and his deceased son lived in Ahmedabad while the rest of the family have settled abroad. The father stayed back in India to support his deceased son but he fell prey to several vices including addicted to drugs, alcohol, was unemployed and frequently demanded money. The witness statements of the neighbours of the indicated that the frequently heard quarrelling sounds coming from their home at wee hours. Examining the material on record the court noted that the father must have been fed up with the son's conduct and decided to eliminate him leading to the present offence.

After pursuing the material on record, FIR, order of the Sessions Court that disallowed the bail application at the initial stage, the availability of the father at the time of trial, role attributed to the father, the Court observed the application deserved to be allowed.

It directed that the father be released on executing a personal bond of Rs 10,000 subject to certain conditions.

The Court however said that the concerned trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by the high court in its bail order. 

Case Title: Nileshbhai Jayantilal Joshi vs State of Gujarat

Case Number: Cr.MA 2586 of 2025

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 56