Suresh Ramchandra Pawar v. the State of Maharashtra
Case brief
What is this about?
In Criminal Bail Application No. 679 of 2015, the Bombay High Court rejected the bail plea of an accused facing charges under section 376 IPC and POCSO Act. The court found no grounds to grant bail despite the absence of external injuries, observing that the case severity precluded release.
What did the court decide?
The Application for bail is rejected.
What the court decided
7.BA679_2015.doc
Vidya Amin
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 679 OF 2015
Suresh Ramchandra Pawar ... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
Mr. Rajaram V. Bansode, Advocate for the applicant. Mrs. Veera Shinde, APP for the respondent/State.
CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATE : JULY 24, 2015
P.C.:
This Application is moved for bail. The applicant/accused is facing prosecution under section 376(1)(2)(i) of Indian Penal Code and under sections 4, 5 r/w.6, 8, 10, 11 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The incident of rape has taken place on 26th July, 2014.
- As per the case of the prosecution, the applicant/accused was a driver of Omni van and used to take the students including prosecutrix from their home to school. The applicant was caught red-handed by a witness and the matter was informed to the victim’s parents. The victim told the whole incident that she was ravished by the applicant/accused on that day and earlier also, the applicant/accused behaved in such a manner with her. The complaint was lodged by the mother of the prosecutrix on 26th July, 2014, pursuant to which, the offence was registered at C.R. No.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted in a case involving prosecution under section 376 IPC and POCSO Act where the applicant is a repeat offender or was in prison for one year.
Whether the absence of external injuries on the prosecutrix warrants release on bail.
Whether the bail application deserves to be allowed or rejected.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Suresh Ramchandra Pawar
- respondent
The State of Maharashtra
Coram
MRIDULA BHATKAR
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court