Allowed

Khandu Ram Nimat v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC12 Apr 2016APPLN/1898/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application under sections 363, 366-A, and 376(2)(i) IPC and section 4 POCSO, the court granted bail to an 18-year-old applicant who was in judicial custody for offences committed against a 14-year-old girl.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon executing P.R. bond and furnishing surety of Rs. 15,000 each, with non-bailable条件和 territorial restrictions.

Khandu Ram Nimat Vs the State of Maharashtra — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

1 Cri. Appln. 1898-2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1898 OF 2016

¶4

Khandu Ram Nimat

¶5

Age – 18 years, Occupation – Student,
R/o. Chincholi (Mali), Tq. Kaij,
Dist. Beed

¶6

[At present in Judicial Custody
in District Prison, Beed].. Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Dharur,
Dist. Beed.. Respondent

¶9

.....

¶10

Mr. S.J. Salunke, Advocate for the applicant
Mr. A.S. Shinde, APP for the respondent-State

¶11

......

¶12

CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J.
 DATED : 12/04/2016

¶13

ORAL ORDER:

¶14

Heard both sides.

¶15

2.The present applicant, who was arrested by

¶16

Dharur Police Station, Dist. Beed in Crime no. 154 of
2015 for the offences punishable under section 363,
366-A, 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and under
section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual

¶17

2 Cri. Appln. 1898-2016

¶18

Offences Act, is praying for his release on bail.

¶19

3.The applicant was arrested on 02/12/2015. The
chargesheet is now filed.

¶20

4.Statement of the victim, who was 14 years and
3 months old at the time of occurrence, would show that
she had a love affair with the present applicant, who
is 18 years old. Out of the said love affair, as the
applicant asked her for going away, she accompanied him
to Alandi, Pune and stayed with him from 04/11/2015 to
02/12/2015.

¶21

5.Upon hearing both sides and finding that the
investigation is completed and the trial would take its
own time, in my view, the applicant can very well be
released on bail.In the circumstances, the following
order:-

¶22

6. The Application is allowed.

¶23

7.The applicant be released on bail in Crime

¶24

no.154 of 2015 registered with Dharur Police Station,

¶25

3 Cri. Appln. 1898-2016

¶26

Dist. Beed for the offences punishable under section
363, 366-A, 376(2)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and
under section 4 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act, upon his executing P.R. bond in
the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) and also
upon furnishing surety in the like amount.

¶27

8.The applicant shall not enter the territorial
limits of Dharur town, Dist. Beed for a period of two
(2) years or till the trial is concluded, whichever
occurs earlier, except without the prior permission
from the concerned Sessions Court.

¶28

9.Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

arp/-

Khandu Ram Nimat v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khandu Ram Nimat 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

Gajrabai Somling Kattimani Vs the State of Maharashtra

Darasingh S/O. Thavra Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ankush S/O. Manohar Dhakare and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ajay Dinkar More Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dhiraj Shankar Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra

Parag Machindra Patare Vs the State of Maharashtra