Allowed

Navnath Sopan Khadtare v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Oct 2004APPLN/4271/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal application regarding bail in a sexual assault and attempt to outrage modesty case, the High Court granted bail on strict conditions after the public prosecutor admitted medical evidence did not support the prosecution's claim of sexual contact between parties.

What did the court decide?

Bail enlarged on executing personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to strict conditions including reporting to police and non-interference with witnesses.

Navnath Sopan Khadtare Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheating and Forgery | Bombay HC (2004)

¶1

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOBBY

¶3

 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4271 OF 2004

¶5

 Navnath Sopan Khadatare .. Applicant.

¶6

 V/s.

¶7

 The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent.
 -----

¶8

 Shri P.R. Arjunwadkar for Applicant.
 Shri D.R. More, APP for Respondent.

¶9

 -----

¶10

 CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.
 DATED : 25.10.2004
PC :-

¶11

 . Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
 Perused the record.

¶12

 . The learned APP fairly accepts that so far as
 the medical evidence is concerned, that does not
 support the prosecution case suggesting sexual contact
 between the applicant and the prosecutrix. If it is
 so, the other serious charge against the applicant is
 under section 452 (1) of IPC. However, taking over
 all view of the matter, the applicant can be granted
 bail on strict conditions, as under :-

¶13

¶14

 The Applicant is enlarged on bail in
 connection with C.R.No.108/2004, registered
 with Pandharpur Taluka Police Station, Solapur
 on executing personal bond in the sum of Rs.
 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty -five thousand only)
 with two local sureties in the like amount.

¶15

 The Applicants shall not enter the
 jurisdiction of Pandharpur Police Station
 during the pendency of the trial except for
 attending the trial.

¶16

 The applicant shall inform his place of
 residence to the investigating officer as well
 as trial court within one week from the date
 of his release. Besides, the applicant shall
 report the nearest police station once in a
 week, on Saturday between 10 a.m. to 1 p.m.

¶17

 The Applicants shall extend full co-operation
 for early disposal of the trial. If the trial
 court is of the opinion that the applicant is
 responsible for delay in trial that fact be
 recorded in the Rozanama, which can be a

¶18

¶19

 ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

 The applicant shall not influence the
 prosecution witness or tamper with the
 prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶21

 . Order accordingly.

Navnath Sopan Khadtare v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navnath Sopan Khadtare v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Dr.Suresh G.Motwani

Abdul Aleem Ismail Qazi Vs Scindia Workshop Limited and Anr.

Shri Pandurang Mahadeo Rahate Vs

Shridhar Suman Vagal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Jitendra Pal R.Mehra and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajkumar Shitalprasad Kaknani Vs the State of Maharashtra