Allowed

Mohan Ramesh Kandal and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC12 Nov 2014BA/1476/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application where the complainant voluntarily stated in court that the names of the applicants were wrongly accused by villagers due to a grudge. Consequently, a prima facie case for bail was made out despite the serious nature of the sexual assault charges.

What did the court decide?

Applicants enlarged on bail by furnishing a P.R. Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

Mohan Ramesh Kandal and Anr. Vs the State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

BA-1476-2014.sxw

¶2

Mhi 1

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL BAILAPPLICATION NO. 1476 OF 2014

¶5

Mohan Ramesh Kandal ) 2. Jagdish Vijay Garel ).. Applicants vs.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra ) 2. Surekha Ankush Waghe ). Respondents

¶7

Mr. Rajeev Patil, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Onkar Warange, for the applicant Mr.A.S.Shitole, APP, for the respondent-State.

¶8

CORAM: SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV,J. DATE : 12th November, 2014.

¶9

P.C .

¶10

Heard. This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicants herein are arrested on 24.9.2013 in Crime No.114 of 2013 registered at Ganeshpuri Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 376-D, 341 read with Section 34 of IPC. The investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed on 29.11.2013.

¶11

It is the case of the prosecution that on 24.9.2013, Ms 'x' lodged a report at the police station alleging therein that on 22.9.2013, after attending a

¶12

Mhi 2 BA-1476-2014.sxw

¶13

cultural programme, she was returning home at mid-night and at that time, five persons had obstructed her. They had dragged her to a dilapidated house of Santosh Khekri and she had been ravished by all the four persons. The names of the present applicants are shown as accused Nos. 4 and 5. The supplementary statement of the daughter of the victim was recorded which shows that she was taken to the police station and she had verified all the five accused persons, who had allegedly ravished her mother in the intervening night of 22^nd and 23^rd of September,2013. In fact, the daughter of the victim is not an eye-witness. Her evidence is a hearsay evidence in which she states that she was taken to the police station and therefore she has identified all the five accused persons. In her first statement, she had stated that her mother had disclosed to her that she was ravished by the abovementioned persons. In fact, this amount to humiliation of daughter of the victim.

¶14

Upon perusal of the papers of investigation and the observation of the District Judge-1, Thane, that the complainant had appeared before the Court and had filed an affidavit in favour of the present applicants, this Court had directed the applicants to add the original complainant as party-respondent. Amendment was carried out forthwith. Notice was served upon the complainant by Ganeshpuri Police Station.

¶15

Mhi 3

¶16

BA-1476-2014.sxw

¶17

Today, the complainant is present in Court in person and her identity is duly verified by the learned APP with the help of the Investigating Officer. Today also, the complainant has stated before this Court that she does not know the present applicants, that they were not involved in the incident dated 22.9.2013 and when she had been to the police station to lodge the report, she was accompanied by several people and one of them had given the names of the present applicants as accused persons. It is verified by the learned APP that the complainant had not filed the affidavit under any coercion or pressure from the relatives of the applicants. Hence, her statement is considered by this Court as a voluntary statement.

¶18

Taking into consideration the fact that after filing of charge-sheet, the complainant has candidly stated before the Court that the names of the applicants have been stated wrongly by other villagers who may, in all probabilities, have some grudge against the present applicants. In view of this, the applicants have made out a prima facie case for grant of bail.

¶19

The observations made hereinabove are prima facie in nature and the Sessions Court shall not be influenced by the same at the time of trial.

Mhi 4

BA-1476-2014.sxw

O R D E R

The application is allowed. The applicants be enlarged on bail on

¶24

each furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one or two sureties in

¶25

the like amount.

¶26

Application stands disposed of.

¶27

(SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.)

Mohan Ramesh Kandal and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Ramesh Kandal and Anr. 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 Mahadeo Govind Jadhav and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Mahadeo Govind Jadhav and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Rahul Ramdas Yeole and Ors.

Mohammad Akhil Qureshi @ Vakil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohd Maqbool Mohd Shoib Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Akash Ashok Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra