The High Court considered a bail application in a case involving sexual assault under IPC and POCSO. Observing the nature of the complaint and evidence, the court held it unnecessary to detain the applicant and granted bail.
The applicant is released on bail on furnishing PR & SB of Rs.50,000/- with one solvent surety in like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
( 1 ) cria1268.17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1268 OF 2017
Deepak Prakash Bairagi..Applicant
Age. 32 years, Occ. Labour,
R/o. Rampeth, Near Marimata Temple,
Warangaon, Tq. Bhusawal,
Dist. Jalgaon.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra..Respondent
Mr.A.R. Syed, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr.A.R. Borulkar, A.P.P. for respondent/State.
CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE,J.
DATED :17.04.2017
P.C. :-
1.This application is filed for bail. Both the
sides are heard. The papers of investigation were made
available for perusal.
2.The crime is registered at C.R. No.137 of 2016
in Ramanand Police Station, Dist.Jalgaon, for the
offences punishable under sections 376(2) (I) (J),
354A(1)(i), 506 of the Indian Penal Code and sections
3(B), 4,6,7,8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act. It is case of the complainant that
( 2 ) cria1268.17
one month prior to the date of the report, when she was
present outside the house and present applicant was
present inside the house, she heard shouts of the victim
girl and so she went inside. The applicant was servant of
the family of the complainant. She noticed that present
applicant was moving his finger in the private part of
the victim girl. She became angry. The applicant left the
house after giving threat to the complainant. It is
contention of the complainant that she disclosed the
incident to her husband and mother-in-law, but to avoid
defamation, they avoided to give report. It is her case
that at the time of passing urine, the victim girl used
to cry.
3.It is case of the complainant that there was
some dispute between her and husband and during enqiry,
which was done at the Redressal Forum on 10.11.2016, she
disclosed the incident to the Members of the Redressal
Committee. It is her case that they advised her to take
the victim girl to the Doctor. After examination of the
victim girl, the Doctor said that there was injury to
private part of the victim girl and then the complainant
decided to give report.
4.This Court has seen the medical report. This
Court is avoiding to discuss the medical record. The
victim girl is about three years old and there was no
question of recording her statement and every aspect of
the matter will be on the basis of aforesaid material and
the version of the mother of the victim girl. After
about one month of the aforesaid incident, the report was
given and it is not her contention that after the
incident witnessed by her, which was prior to one month
of filing of the report, there was any opportunity to the
applicant to do anything. All these things need to be
kept in mind. The applicant has been behind the bar
since 11.11.2016. Though the crime is registered for the
aforesaid offence, in view of the nature of the material,
this Court holds that it is not desirable to keep the
applicant behind the bar till disposal of the case, which
is filed against him.
i.In the result, the application is allowed.
ii.The applicant – Deepak Prakash Bairagi be
released on bail, in connection with Crime No.137 of
2016, registered with Ramanand Police Station, Dist.
Jalgaon, for the offences punishable under section
376(2), (I), (J), 354A(1)(i), 506 of the Indian Penal
Code and sections 3(B), 4,6,7,8 and 12 of the Protection
of Children from Sexual Offences Act, on his furnishing
PR & SB of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one
( 4 ) cria1268.17
solvent surety in like amount.
iii.The applicant is not to tamper the prosecution
witnesses and he is not to commit similar offence.
iv.The applicant is not to enter Jalgaon city,
except for attending the case, which is filed against
him, till disposal of the case.
[T.V. NALAWADE,J.]
snk/2017/APR17/ cria1268.17
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the accused should be released on bail in a case involving offences under Section 376(2)(I)(J) IPC and POCSO Act.
Whether physical presence of the accused is necessary for disposal of the bail application.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Deepak Prakash Bairagi
The State of Maharashtra
T.V. NALAWADE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court