Artist Chintan Upadhyay jailed since 2015 in wife’s murder case granted bail by SC

MUMBAI: In a major relief to artist Chintan Upadhyay, the Supreme Court on Friday granted him bail in the sensational 2015 double murder case of his wife Hema and her lawyer, reports Swati Deshpande.
A bench noted that the trial is in progress and 12 witnesses are yet to be examined. “We are of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to bail having been incarcerated for nearly six years,” it said in its order.

The apex court said the bail amount and other conditions would be decided by the trial court, but made it clear Upadhyay cannot stay in Mumbai.The SC also directed that the trial be completed expeditiously, “preferably within six months”.
Chintan gets bail over ‘delay in trial’, but can’t stay in city
Granting bail to artist Chintan Upadhyay in the 2015 double murder case, the Supreme Court on Friday directed him to surrender his passport and report to the police every month. It also made it clear he cannot stay in Mumbai, where he used to stay. “He shall reside in any place other than Mumbai and shall visit Mumbai only to attend court,” a bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and Bhushan Gavai said.
Upadhyay and four others were arrested in December 2015 (see box) after the body of his artist-wife Hema and her lawyer Haresh Bhambhani were recovered in a nullah in Kandivli and has been in custody since.
The state counsel opposed any relief to Upadhyay and pointed out that 29 witnesses have been examined while 12 main witnesses are remaining, but the SC agreed with the submissions of Upadhyay’s senior counsel Raja Thakare and advocates Bharat Manghani and Dilip Taur that he has been behind bars for long.
In 2019, when Upadhyay had moved SC after getting no relief at the sessions and high courts, it had declined bail after the state pledged that the trial would be completed in nine months. It was not done, and Upadhyay moved the Bombay high court, which junked his bail on the grounds that there is incriminating material against him. He again knocked on the doors of the SC, and finally, on Friday got bail.
Besides claiming that he deserved bail over the undue delay in trial, Upadhyay had submitted that there was “not enough material” against him and questioned the submissions made by the prosecution to try him for murder. An incriminating diary entry referred to by the prosecution didn’t exist as proved by an RTI reply, he pointed out. The police had claimed there was a diary entry where Upadhyay had referred to his enmity towards Hema.