MUMBAI, April 6 -- The wife of 33-year-old Dhrumil Patel, who died in an accident near Somaiya College in Vidyavihar on February 5, has moved the Bombay High Court seeking cancellation of bail granted to the father of the 17-year-old boy who was allegedly driving the car without a licence. The car rammed into the scooter the couple was travelling in, resulting in Patel's death. The plea challenges the March 4 sessions court order which granted bail to the boy's father, the owner of the vehicle, contending that the court ignored material suggesting his knowledge of and role in facilitating the offence. Filed under Section 483(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita through advocate Ruben Mascarenhas, the application argues that prior instances of the minor's reckless driving and his access to the vehicle indicate the father's awareness, attracting liability under the Motor Vehicles Act. The petition also mentions an alleged Rs.40 lakh "blood money" offer made to the victim to withdraw the complaint and flags concerns over possible witness influence and evidence tampering. According to the FIR, the minor allegedly hit the scooter around 11.15pm, critically injuring both victims. Patel died on February 15, after which police added culpable homicide not amounting to murder along with rash and negligent driving provisions and offences under the Motor Vehicles Act. The father was arrested on February 10 under Section 199A. A Vikhroli magistrate rejected the father's bail on February 23, citing prima facie evidence of his knowledge of the minor's driving. However, on March 4, the sessions court granted him bail, holding that there was insufficient material to show he knew the car had been taken, relying inter alia on a watchman's statement. The petitioner has argued that the sessions court misread the watchman's statement, which, according to her, indicates a pattern of the minor accessing the car with tacit approval. The plea also relies on screenshots from the minor's Instagram account allegedly showing repeated reckless driving. The alleged Rs.40 lakh offer is cited as evidence of attempts to influence witnesses. The High Court will examine whether the sessions court ignored material evidence, including the scope of guardian liability under Section 199A, the relevance of prior conduct and social media evidence at the bail stage. The High Court will also examine whether the sessions court's grant of bail can stand in the face of material on record and the allegations of interference....