Dismissed

Mangesh Namdeo Pawar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC11 Oct 2017APPA/660/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal application, the High Court of Bombay dismissed the applicant's plea to suspend the execution of his sentence. The applicant, a bus attendant convicted under IPC 376 and POCSO for raping a four-year-old child, argued for bail. The court held that given the grave nature of the crime and corroborated evidence, this was not a fit case to grant suspension or bail.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Applications dismissed; execution of sentence ordered to proceed.

Mangesh Namdeo Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

33-APPA-660-17

¶2

Sarnobat

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 660 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 154 OF 2017 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 900 OF 2017 IN

¶5

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 154 OF 2017

¶6

Mangesh Namdeo Pawar. .. Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra. .. Respondent.

¶9

Mr. S. A. Shaikh I/b Mr. S. J. Singh, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. S. V. Gavand, APP for the Respondent/State.

¶10

CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDES SAI, J. DATE : 11th OCTOBER, 2017.

¶11

P. C. :

¶12

By these applications the applicant has sought suspension

¶13

of execution of sentence imposed by the judgment dated 17^th January, 2017 in POCSO Special Case No. 154 of 2014 and prayed for release on bail.

¶14

The applicant herein was prosecuted for the offences under Section 376 of IPC and Section 4 and 8 of the Protection of

¶15

1/3

¶16

33-APPA-660-17

¶17

Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The case of the prosecution in brief is that the victim, a child of about four years used to go to school by a school van of Arvind Travels. The applicant herein was as attendant in the said van. On 13^th February 2014 when the victim returned home from the school, she looked scared. The mother of the victim found some blood in her private part and upon inquiry the victim told her that the applicant herein had sexually abused her. F.I.R. lodged by the mother of the victim under crime No. 49/2014 for the aforesaid offences came to be registered. Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed. The learned Special Judge after considering the evidence on record, has held the applicant guilty of the aforesaid offences and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for Seven years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month in respect of offence under section 376 of Indian Penal Code. The applicant herein has been further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for Seven years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month in

¶18

2/3

¶19

33-APPA-660-17

¶20

respect of offence under section 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for One week in respect of offence under Section 8 of the Protection of Chileren From Sexual Offences Act.

¶21

The evidence of the victim as well as the mother of the victim prima facie indicates that the applicant herein was the attendant of the School van in which the victim was traveling, and he had raped and sexually abused her. The evidence of victim and her mother-PW 2 is also corroborated by the medical evidence. There is prima facie material to show the involvement of the applicant in committing the crime, which offence is not only of serious nature but a heinous crime against the Society.

¶22

In view of the facts and circumstances, in my considered view this is not a fit case to suspend the execution of sentence. Hence, both the applications are dismissed.

¶23

[ ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J ]

¶24

3/3

Mangesh Namdeo Pawar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangesh Namdeo Pawar 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

M/S.Omkar Steel Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sambhaji S. Mundhe Vs Ravindra v. Pol and Anr.

Syed Abid Husain @ Ali Bhai Vs the State of Maharashtra

Employees State Insurance Corporation Pune Vs Lakshmandas Narottamdas Shaha and Another

Milind Gopalrao Gujrathi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Milind Gopalrao Gujrathi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.