Allowed

Govind Vithal Chinchole and Ors. v. the State of Mah

Bombay HC26 Nov 2012APPLN/3628/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

It was held that substantive sentences of convicted applicants for sexual offences be suspended, and they be released on bail upon furnishing a Personal Bond of Rs.20,000/- and surety of the same amount by each applicant. No substantial misuse of liberty was found.

What did the court decide?

The substance of sentences suspended; applicants released on executing P.R. Bond of Rs.20,000/- and surety of equal amount by each.

Govind Vithal Chinchole and Ors. Vs the State of Mah — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

1 3628-12-crappln.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3628 OF 2012 IN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO....... OF 2012

¶5

1] Govind s/o. Vithal Chinchole,

¶6

2] Dattatraya s/o. Pandurang Dukare,

¶7

3] Devidas s/o. Rajaram Shinde,
4] Sharad s/o. Rajaram Shinde..Applicants
Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra..Respondent

¶9

Mr.J.R.Shah, advocate for applicants.

¶10

Mr.R.P.Phatake, APP for respondent State.
.........

¶11

CORAM : M.T.JOSHI, J.
DATED : NOVEMBER 26, 2012

¶12

PER COURT :

¶13

Heard both sides.

¶14

2]Present applicants who are convicted by the

¶15

2 3628-12-crappln.odt

¶16

learned Sessions Judge for offence punishable
under Sections 376(2)(g) and 366 read with 34 of
of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer
rigorous imprisonment on different terms out of
which, rigorous imprisonment for ten years is the
highest, are praying for their release on bail.

¶17

3]Learned counsel for the applicants submits
that there is no corroborative piece of material
in the nature of the medical examination i.e. any
injury on the private part of prosecutrix. Only
four simple abrasions were stated to be found on
the person of prosecutrix. Learned counsel for
applicants submits that the applicants have not
misused the liberty, during trial.

¶18

4]On the other hand, learned APP opposes the
application. He submits that learned Sessions
Judge, finding that the statement of prosecutrix
is straight-forward and reliable, has convicted
the present applicants.

¶19

5]Considering the overall nature of allegations
and the fact that the applicants were released on
bail during pendency of trial, in my view,
substantive sentences needs to be suspended and
the applicants deserves to be released on bail.

¶20

3 3628-12-crappln.odt

¶21

6]In the circumstances, substantive sentences in
the present case are hereby suspended. The
applicants be released on executing P.R. Bond of
Rs.20,000/- by each and also on furnishing surety
in the like amount by each.

¶22

7] Criminal Application is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶23

[M.T.JOSHI, J.]

¶24

kbp

Govind Vithal Chinchole and Ors. v. the State of Mah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind Vithal Chinchole and Ors. v. the State of Mah

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 Mah Vs Manoj@Munna Subash Kathare and Ors.

The State of Mah Vs Dr. Ashok Lahuji Bansod and Anr.

Dharasur Mardini Nagari Sahakari Pat Purwatha Sanstha Ltd. Vs Ramesh Pandurang Shinde

The State of Mah Vs Ramesh Parashram Sonawane and Anr.

The State of Mah Vs Ganesh Mahadeo Thorat

Rahul Manikrao Aabne Vs the State of Mah