Allowed

Sunil Rajaram Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC19 Sept 2014BA/1378/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application in a rape case involving a minor prosecutrix allowed on conditions including a ban on entering the taluka and protection orders against the victim's family, while granting intervention to the victim.

What did the court decide?

Accused enlarged on bail with a P.R. bond of Rs. 25,000; ordered not to enter Karveer Taluka; prohibited from pressuring victim; must stand all court dates; leave India only with permission.

Sunil Rajaram Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

¶1

912.BA1378_2014.doc

¶2

Vidya Amin

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1378 OF 2014

¶6

WITH

¶7

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 502 OF 2014

¶8

Sunil Rajaram Patil … Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent And Priyanka Pandit Patil … Applicant/Intervener

¶9

Mr. Umesh R. Mankapure, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the State.

¶10

Mr. Sandeep Koregave i/b. Mr. Prashant Bhavake, Advocate for the applicant/intervener.

¶11

I.O. Mr. Ganesh S. Maske, A.P.I., Baramati Taluka Police Station, Pune (Rural) present.

¶12

CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : 19^th September, 2014.

¶13

P.C.

¶14

Criminal Application No. 502 of 2014 filed by the complainant for

¶15

intervention is allowed.

¶16

This Application is moved for bail, as the applicant/accused is

¶17

facing prosecution for the offences punishable under sections 376(1), 109, 506 in C.R. No. 111/2014 registered at Karveer Police Station, District Kolhapur.

¶18

It is the case of the prosecutrix that in the year 2010 when she was

¶19

1 of 4

¶20

912.BA1378_2014.doc

¶21

16 years old, the applicant/accused tried to seduce her. They are neighbours, residents of Village Aamshi, Taluka Karveer, District Kolhapur. They were in love with each other. At that time, the applicant/accused imposed sexual relationship on her. He promised her that he would marry her and under deceit, he obtained her consent for sexual intercourse. At the relevant time, the prosecutrix was 16 years old, therefore, the applicant/accused suggested that after she attains majority, he would marry her. She believed in him and thereafter their relationship continued. She never consented of such relationship but the applicant/accused forced her to keep such relationship. During the period of four years, she also took her nude photograph and used to threaten her that he would upload those photographs on the internet and blackmailed her sexually. Now the applicant/accused refused to marry her and therefore, she gave report to the police station.

¶22

The learned counsel for the applicant/accused submitted that the applicant/accused and the complainant were in love with each other. Both of them tried to commit suicide in between, as they found that their respective parents may not approve the marriage. He further argued that the applicant/accused is arrested on 21^st April, 2014 and he is in prison since then. He submitted that the applicant never tried to seduce the complainant by giving false promise of marriage. The charges of rape

¶23

2 of 4

¶24

912.BA1378_2014.doc

¶25

levelled against the applicant is false. He further submitted that the applicant/accused has given complaint to the police station that one police naik demanded bribe from him for filing charge sheet and therefore the complaint was registered against him and trap was laid and the police naik was suspended. The case was registered at C.R. No. 38/2014.

¶26

Learned APP opposed the application and submitted that at the time of sexual relationship, the prosecutrix was minor, therefore, the offence of rape has been committed.

¶27

The learned counsel for the intervener submitted that the prosecutrix has filed an affidavit on 19^th June, 2014 that she has received threats from the uncle and father of the applicant/accused that as soon as the applicant is released on bail, they would assault her or her relatives.

¶28

This is a case of love affair at immature age. The applicant/accused was 28 years old. Though he was mature, the prosecutrix was minor, i.e. 16 years old. Thereafter after attaining majority also she continued sexual relationship with the applicant. The age of the prosecutrix in the year 2014 is stated as 21 years. Considering the allegations made and as the applicant/accused is in the prison since last 9 months, I am inclined to release the applicant/accused on bail on the following terms and conditions:

3 of 4

912.BA1378_2014.doc

O R D E R

(i) The applicant/accused be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in a sum of Rs.25,000/ with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶33

(ii) As the families of the applicant/accused and prosecutrix

¶34

are neighbours, the applicant/accused shall not enter Karveer Taluka till the trial is over.

¶35

(iii) The applicant/accused and his relatives shall not pressurize the prosecutrix and her relatives.

¶36

(iv) The applicant/accused shall stand all the Court dates.

¶37

(v) Violation of any of the conditions imposed shall amount

¶38

to cancellation of bail forthwith.

¶39

(vi) The applicant/accused shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court.

¶40

Intervention Application is accordingly disposed of.

¶41

(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)

¶42

4 of 4

Sunil Rajaram Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Rajaram Patil v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hannursidha Kellappa Shejale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Union of India Vs Beghani Talab Suleman @ Bashir @ T Kara and Anr.

Yogesh Sadashiv Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahadev Dattu Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra

Bharat Mrugendra Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Balkrushna @ Balaji Shivaji @ Shivajirao Katare Vs the State of Maharashtra