Allowed

Satish Ashok Rajput v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC29 Oct 2015ABA/1637/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay at Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in C.R. No. 103 of 2015, registered under IPC Sections 354(d), 341, 504, 506 and POCSO Sections 11, 12. The court imposed conditions including attendance at the police station and non-interference with witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail conditioned upon furnishing P.R. Bond, weekly police station attendance, and prohibiting tampering with complainant or witnesses.

Satish Ashok Rajput Vs the State of Maharashtra — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

943-aba.1637.2015.doc

¶2

1/4

¶3

nsc.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1637 OF 2015

¶6

Satish Ashok Rajput ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶7

Mr.Girish Agrawal i/b Mr.U.R.Mankapure, for the Applicant

¶8

Ms.S.D.Shinde, APP for the Respondent – State.

¶9

ASI – Suryavanshi, Sanjay Nagar Police Station, Sangli.

¶10

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶11

DATE : 29^th OCTOBER, 2015

¶12

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P.

¶13

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No. 103 of 2015 registered with the Sanjay Nagar Police Station, Sangli for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 354(d), 341, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 11 and

¶14

943-aba.1637.2015.doc

¶15

2/4

¶16

12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

¶17

The complainant is aged 15 years 8 months and the applicant is aged about 22 years of age. According to the complainant, the applicant was stalking her since May, 2015. She has alleged that despite her disclosing to the applicant that she would not be his friend, the applicant continued to stalk her. She has alleged that about 2 – 3 months prior to the lodging of the complaint, the applicant came on his motorcycle and stalked her while she was proceeding towards her college and questioned her why she was not calling her and sending message to him. She is alleged to have disclosed the said incident to her mother as well as to her brother. According to her, the applicant was stalking her, abusing her and was threatening her.

¶18

Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the applicant

¶19

and the complainant were known to each other and were friends. He relied on certain photographs in support of the same. He submitted that the allegations are false and baseless.

¶20

943-aba.1637.2015.doc

¶21

3/4

¶22

Perused the FIR as well as the photographs annexed by the

¶23

learned counsel for the applicant. Considering the nature of allegations, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail on the following terms and conditions :

¶24

ORDER

¶25

(i) In the event of the arrest, the applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount ;

¶26

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on every Saturday between 10.00 a.m. to 11.00 a.m., till the filing of the charge-sheet ;

¶27

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper or attempt to influence the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

¶28

The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶29

It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima

¶30

943-aba.1637.2015.doc

¶31

4/4

¶32

facie and are confined to this application and the learned Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made herein.

¶33

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶34

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Satish Ashok Rajput v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Ashok Rajput 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

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Jagannath Khandagale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Suresh Kisan Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mihir Ayub Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shahaji Krishna Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dr Amjad R. Choudhary Vs Abdul Aziz Qureshi and Ors.

Anil Babulal Kuril Vs the State of Maharashtra