Allowed

Siraj Shaikh Nazim Shaukatshaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC30 Jul 2014APPLN/2429/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under CrPC, the High Court at Aurangabad allowed the release of a first-time arrested applicant accused of aggravated offences against a child under POCSO and IPC. The court directed the filing of a bond and surety of Rs. 30,000 and imposed territorial restrictions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon executing P.R. bond of Rs. 30,000 and furnishing surety in the like amount; restriction on entering specific village limits for 2 years.

Siraj Shaikh Nazim Shaukatshaikh Vs the State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

1 Cri. Appln. 2429-2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2429 OF 2014

¶4

Siraj Shaikh S/o Nazim (Shaukat) Shaikh,
Age : 19 years, Occu.: Labour,
R/o : Tuljapur,
Tq. : Paithan, Dist.: Aurangabad

¶5

.. APPLICANT

¶6

 VERSUS

¶7

The State of Maharashtra

¶8

.. RESPONDENT

¶9

.....

¶10

Mr. Patel Shaikh Ashpak Taher, Advocate for applicant
Mr. B.L. Dhas, APP for the respondent-State

¶11

......

¶12

CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J. DATED : 30/07/2014

¶13

ORAL ORDER:

¶14

1. Heard both sides.

¶15

2.The present applicant, who is arrested on
3/9/2013 by Paithan Police Station, Dist. Aurangabad
in Crime no. 188 of 2013 for the offences punishable
under section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code and
under section 6,8 and 10 of Protection of Children
From Sexual Offences Act, out of which now, Sessions
Case No.385 of 2013 is pending, is praying for his
release on bail.

¶16

3.The present applicant is neighbour of the
complainant. Her complaint would show that while

¶17

2 Cri. Appln. 2429-2014

¶18

she was away from her house in the noon, the present
applicant called her six year's daughter in his
house and thereafter, he forcibly committed sexual
intercourse with her. The daughter complained that
the present applicant has taken away all her clothes
and thereafter, he sat over her stomach and when she
started crying, the mother of the applicant directed
the applicant to open the door.

¶19

4.The complainant further alleged that the
daughter was not in a position to sit and had
certain pain during urination and therefore the
complaint came to be filed on the same day of the
incident.

¶20

5.Learned counsel for the applicant submits
that the applicant is behind the bar since long.
The medical examination of the alleged victim girl
on the same date would not fortify the allegations
in the FIR., the trial may take its own time and
hence the applicant be released on bail.

¶21

6.The learned A.P.P. opposed the application.
He submits that serious allegations against the
present applicant are there.

¶22

7.The medical examination report would show
that the victim girl had no injuries, neither there
were any signs of penetration in the private part of
the said girl.

¶23

3 Cri. Appln. 2429-2014

¶24

8.In the circumstances, without making any
comment on the merit of the case and finding that
the applicant is behind the bar for a long period,
the following order:-

¶25

I)The Application is allowed.

¶26

II)The applicant be released on bail in Crime
no. 188 of 2013 registered with Paithan Police
Station, Dist. Aurangabad for the offences
punishable under section 376(2) of the Indian Penal
Code and under section 6,8 and 10 of Protection of
Children From Sexual Offences Act, upon his
executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rs.
Thirty Thousand) and also upon furnishing surety in
the like amount.

¶27

III)The applicant shall not enter the

¶28

territorial limits of village Navgaon, Tq. Paithan,
Dist. Aurangabad for a period of two (2) years or
till the trial is concluded, whichever occurs
earlier, without any prior permission from the
concerned Sessions Court.

¶29

9.Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶30

arp/-

Siraj Shaikh Nazim Shaukatshaikh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Siraj Shaikh Nazim Shaukatshaikh 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

Ashabai Tukaram Jadhav and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra

Subhash Bhausaheb Badoge Vs the State of Maharashtra

Subhash Sukhdev Jadhav and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vakil @ Pintya Gopichand Rathod Vs the State of Maharashtra

Prassana Vinaykumar Kothari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Anand Amarchandji Surana Vs Prasanna Vinaykumar Kothari and Another