Allowed

Dipak S/O. Ambadas Gujrathi and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC16 Apr 2016APPLN/1923/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Application filed seeking bail for accused arrested in connection with offences under POCSO, PITA, and IPC 376. The High Court allowed the application granting bail upon executing personal bonds and furnishing surety.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail upon executing P.R. bonds of Rs. 15,000 each and furnishing surety in the like amount.

Dipak S/O. Ambadas Gujrathi and Anr. Vs the… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

1 Cri. Appln. 1923-2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1923 OF 2016

¶4

1] Dipak S/o Ambadas Gujrathi, Age 34 years, Occu. Business, R/o Anand Nagar, Nanded,

¶5

 Tq. & District Nanded

¶6

2] Sachin S/o Anil Sharma,

¶7

Age 30 years, Occu.Business, R/o Ganraj Nagar, Bafna,

¶8

 Nanded, Tal. & District Nanded.. Applicants

¶9

 (Orig. Accused)

¶10

Vs.

¶11

The State of Maharashtra
Through the Incharge Police
Station Officer, Police Station,
Sonkhed, Tal. Loha,
District Nanded.. Respondent

¶12

.....

¶13

Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for the applicants
Mr. A.R. Borulkar, APP for the respondent-State

¶14

......

¶15

CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J.
 DATED : 16/04/2016

¶16

ORAL ORDER:

¶17

Heard both sides.

¶18

2.The present applicants, who are arrested by

¶19

Sonkhed Police Station, Tq. Loha, Dist. Nanded in Crime

¶20

2 Cri. Appln. 1923-2016

¶21

no.10 of 2016 for the offences punishable under section

¶22

3, 4, 5 and 9 of the Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act,

¶23

under section 3, 7, 15, 16 of Protection of Children

¶24

from Sexual Offences Act and under section 376 of the
Indian Penal Code, are praying for their release on
bail.

¶25

3.The FIR would show that the present applicants
were the customers when the raid was carried by the
Police Inspector on one dhaba. The medical examination
of the victims of the offence was carried and according

¶26

the Medical Officer opined that both the girls were 17
years old.

¶27

4.Considering the fact that the present

¶28

applicantswerearrestedon20/02/2016and

¶29

investigation qua them is practically complete, the
Application is allowed.

¶30

5.The applicants be released on bail in Crime
no.10 of 2016 registered with Sonkhed Police Station,
Tq. Loha, Dist. Nanded for the offences punishable

¶31

3 Cri. Appln. 1923-2016

¶32

under section 3, 4, 5 and 9 of the Prevention of
Immoral Traffic Act, under section 3, 7, 15, 16 of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and
under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, upon their
executing P.R. bonds in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rs.
Fifteen Thousand) each and also upon furnishing surety

¶33

each in the like amount.

¶34

6.Application stands disposed off accordingly.

¶35

arp/-

Dipak S/O. Ambadas Gujrathi and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dipak S/O. Ambadas Gujrathi 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

Ashok S/O. Anaji Wakchaure Vs the State of Maharashtra

The State of Maharashtra Vs Sandhya W/O Sharadchandra Deshpande and Other

Sayyed Matin S/O Sayyed Rasool Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohammad Mehboob Rafique Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mohammad Mehboob Rafique Ansari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ganesh S/O. Sahebrao Matade Vs the State of Maharashtra