Allowed

Shaikh Waseem S/O Shaikh Mubarak v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Oct 2016APPLN/5933/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal application, the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad allowed the bail plea of an accused facing rape charges. The Single Judge held that prima facie the case involved consensual sex and pre-trial detention was not warranted.

What did the court decide?

The application is allowed; accused released on bail on execution of Police Bond and furnishing surety of Rupees Twenty Thousand.

Shaikh Waseem S/O Shaikh Mubarak Vs the State of Maharashtra — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

( 1 ) cria5933.16

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5933 OF 2016

¶4

Shaikh Waseem s/o. Shaikh Mubarak..Applicant
Age. 19 years, Occ. Driver,
R/o. Naigaon Sawangi,
Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad.

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra..Respondent

¶7

Mr.H.V. Tungar, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr.S.M. Ganachari, APP for respondent/State.

¶8

CORAM : A.M. BADAR,J. DATED : 25.10.2016

¶9

P.C. :-

¶10

1.The applicant/accused in Crime No.170 of 2016
registered with Waluj Police Station, Aurangabad, for
offence punishable under section 376(f), 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, by this application, is seeking his
release on bail after filing of charge-sheet.

¶11

2.Heard learned Counsel for the applicant as well
as learned A.P.P.

¶12

3.Learned A.P.P. opposed the application by
contending that the crime in question is serious and the
statement of the prosecutrix is gaining corroboration
from other material collected by the investigator.

¶13

4.I have perused the charge-sheet. The crime in
question is registered on the basis of report of 26 years
old prosecutrix. As per her version, after death of her
husband, prior to seven years, she came in contact with
the present applicant, who is related to her husband.
The applicant insisted her to marry and had also
threatened her. Subsequently, as per version of the
prosecutrix, she agreed to marry the applicant and the
applicant thereafter established sexual relationship with
her. Then, the applicant refused to marry her.

¶14

5.Rabiabi is mother-in-law of the prosecutrix.
Her statement reveals that from the year 2014, the
applicant and the prosecutrix are in relation and the
applicant used to stay at the house of the prosecutrix.

¶15

6.Prima facie, this appears to be a case of
consensual sex. As such, further pre-trial detention of
the applicant after filing of the charge-sheet is not
warranted. Therefore, the order :-

¶16

( 3 ) cria5933.16

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

i)The application is allowed.

¶19

ii)Applicant/accused – Shaikh Waseem s/o.
Shaikh Mubarak, in Crime No.170 of 2016
registeredwithWalujPoliceStation,
Aurangabad, for offence punishable under section
376(f), 506 of the Indian Penal Code, be
released on bail on executing P.R.Bond of Rs.
20,000/- [Rupees Twenty Thousand] and on
furnishing surety in the like amount.

¶20

iii)As a condition of this Order, the
applicant shall not extend any threat,
inducement or promise to the persons
acquainted with the facts of the accusation
so as to dissuade them from disclosing the same
either to the police or the Court.

¶21

iv)The applicant shall not tamper the
evidence of the prosecution.

¶22

v)The applicant to co-operate the trial Court
in the expeditious disposal of trial against
him.

¶23

[A.M. BADAR,J.]

¶24

snk/2016/OCT16/ cria5933.16

Shaikh Waseem S/O Shaikh Mubarak v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaikh Waseem S/O Shaikh Mubarak 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gautam S/O Laxman Raut Vs the State of Maharashtra

Uday S/O Dyaneshwar Ghaiwat Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vishwajit S/O Ramesh Kasar Vs the State of Mahrashtra

Yogesh Walmik Magar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kundan S/O Roopsingh Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Navnath Changdeo Jondhale Vs Shiva Bhima Telang and Others