Bombay High Court

STATE OF GOA, THR. THE POLICE INSPECTOR, WOMEN POLICE STATIONversusSNEHAL SHIVAJI NIKKAM

Disposal: Disposed of

Holding

The High Court declined to interfere with the bail order and disposed the petition.

Summary

The State of Goa filed a criminal writ petition challenging an order dated 4 March 2024 of the Children's Court that granted bail to the respondent, Snehal Shivaji Nikkam. The petition argued that the bail order should be set aside after more than two years had elapsed and the trial was still ongoing. The High Court examined the record and noted the passage of time but found no sufficient ground to interfere with the bail order at that stage. The Court held that any breach of bail conditions by the respondent could be addressed by a fresh application for cancellation before the competent court. Consequently, the petition was disposed without altering the bail order.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can set aside a bail order granted by a Children's Court after two years have elapsed and the trial is still pending
Whether the State has sufficient grounds to interfere with the bail order at this stage

Subjects

bail
Children's Court
High Court
criminal procedure
bail cancellation
trial pending

Judgment

2026:BHC-GOA:1152
                                              9 WPCR 79 2026

                vinita

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
                            CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.79 OF 2026

           STATE OF GOA, THR. THE POLICE
           INSPECTOR, WOMEN POLICE STATION                        ... PETITIONER
             Versus
           SNEHAL SHIVAJI NIKKAM                                  ... RESPONDENT


           Mr. Somnath Karpe, Additional Public Prosecutor with Mr.
           Anand Shirodkar, Advocates for the Petitioner.


                                   CORAM:- AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, J.
                                   DATED :- 17th June, 2026

           P.C.
                    Heard Mr. Karpe, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
           Petitioner/State.
           2.     By the present petition, the State has challenged the order dated
           04.03.2024 passed by the Children's Court for the State of Goa,
           whereby the Respondent was enlarged on bail.
           3.            I have perused the record and the impugned order dated
           04.03.2024. It is noted that more than two years have elapsed since the
           grant of bail to the Respondent. It is further noted that the trial is
           presently in progress. In these circumstances, I do not deem it
           appropriate to interfere with the impugned order at this stage.
           4.       However, it is made clear that, in the event it is found that the
           Respondent has violated any of the conditions of bail, it shall be open
           to the Petitioner/State to move an appropriate application for

                                                Page 1 of 2
                                               17th June, 2026
                                                             9 WPCR 79 2026


                       cancellation of bail before the competent Court, in accordance with
                       law.
                       5.        With the above observations, the petition stands disposed of.



                                                                   AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, J.




Signed by: VINITA VIKAS NAIK
Designation: Private Secretary
                                                               Page 2 of 2
Date: 18/06/2026 12:57:30
                                                              17th June, 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…