Dismissed

Subhash Isnwara Kadam v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC2 May 2012BA/617/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal bail application filed by a convicted appellant, the High Court declined to suspend the substantive sentence or grant bail. The bench found strong prima facie evidence connecting the applicant to the crime, including sections under the IPC relating to conspiracy, abduction, and rape. Although the applicant argued the victim's conduct implied consent and lack of force, the court wa

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; suspension of sentence denied; request to expedite appeal hearing denied; liberty granted to apply for expeditious hearing in future.

Subhash Isnwara Kadam Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2012)

APPA 617.12.sxw

JPP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 617 OF 2012 IN

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 310 OF 2012

¶7

Mr. Subhash Hiralal Bhosale.

¶8

... Applicant.

¶9

V/s.

¶10

The State of Maharashtra.

¶11

... Respondent.

¶12

Ms. Mallika A. Ingale for the Applicant. Mr. H.J. Dedhia, APP for the State.

¶13

CORAM : P.V. HARDAS &

¶14

A.M. THIPSAY, JJ.

¶15

FEBRUARY 20, 2013.

¶16

P.C. :-

¶17

By this application the Applicant seeks suspension of the substantive sentence of imprisonment and his enlargement on bail pending the decision of the Appeal.

¶18

The Applicant alongwith other accused stands convicted for an offence punishable under Section 120-B of the I.P.C., Section 342 r/w. 120-B, 506(2) r/w. 120-B and 376 (2)(g) r/w. 120-B of I.P.C. The Applicant was also not on bail during trial.

¶19

The victim has been examined as PW-1 and with the assistance of the learned Counsel for the Applicant, we have perused the evidence of PW-1 victim.

¶20

¶21

APPA 617.12.sxw

¶22

The learned Counsel for the Applicant has urged before us that the conduct of the victim in accompanying the Accused to go for an interview from one place to the other at the distance of 1 to 1-1/2 hour, which shows that she has travelled with the consenting party and also to the alleged sexual intercourse. It is further urged before us that the report was lodged at the behest of the police officers and was not a voluntary report lodged by the victim. It is further urged before us that the victim was examined by the medical officer and the report was not suggesting forceful intercourse. It has come in the evidence of prosecution that police had gone to the house of victim where she narrated the incident of gang rape on her.

¶23

Upon examination of the evidence of the prosecutrix, who is examined as PW-1, we find that there is strong primafacie material which connects the Applicant with the commission of crime.

¶24

In the light of such evidence, we are not inclined to suspend the substantive sentence of imprisonment and directing the enlargement of the Applicant on bail. We are further informed that the Bail Application of co-accused has also been rejected by this Court. In the light of the aforesaid facts, therefore, we dismiss this application.

¶25

The learned Counsel for the Applicant has urged for expediting the hearing of the Criminal Appeal. Since this Appeal is of the year 2012, and we are already hearing

¶26

¶27

APPA 617.12.sxw

¶28

Appeals of the year 2004, presently we are not inclined to expedite the hearing of the Appeal. We, however, grant liberty to the Applicant to apply for expeditious hearing of the Appeal in future.

¶29

8. Criminal Application is accordingly dismissed.

¶30

(A.M. THIPSAY, J.)

¶31

(P.V. HARDAS, J.)

Subhash Isnwara Kadam v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subhash Isnwara Kadam 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

Umesh Gundu Koli Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vasant @ Amruti Vishwanath Kshirasagar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Gopal Narayan Hande and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Madhukar Meharman Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Chandrakant @ Gotya Ramdas Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Samir Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra