Allowed

Bhushan @ Laxmikant Ashok Wankhede v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC3 May 2017APPLN/1302/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant, charged under the POCSO Act and IPC, who was already at large at the time of the alleged 2015 incident involving a 17-year-old girl, despite his being in custody since the FIR registration in 2016.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail in Crime No. 98/2016 on furnishing a Personal Bond of Rs. 40,000 with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount.

Bhushan @ Laxmikant Ashok Wankhede Vs the State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

1 Application 1302 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

7 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1302 OF 2017

¶4

BHUSHAN @ LAXMIKANT ASHOK WANKHEDE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶5

Shri. Amol S. Sawant, Advocate, for applicant.

¶6

Shri. A.A. Jagatkar, Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent.

¶7

Coram: T.V. NALAWADE, J.

¶8

Date: 3 May 2017

¶9

ORDER:

¶10

The application is filed for bail. Statement was

¶11

made that this is the first application filed in this Court for bail. Both sides are heard. Papers of investigation were made available for perusal.

¶12

The crime is registered at CR No.98/2016 in Azad Nagar Police Station, District Dhule for offences punishable under section 376 (i) (n), 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The victim girl

¶13

2 Application 1302 of 2017

¶14

has given age as 17 years. It is her case that in 2015 present applicant established contact with her as he used to reside in the vicinity of her house. It is her case that on one day he had sex with her in early morning on the first floor of his house. It is her case that since then she had physical relations with present applicant. It is her case that similarly she came in contact with other person namely one Dhiraj Wagh and she had physical relation with her also. As she missed menstrual period in March 2016, she disclosed the incident to her mother and others and then report was given on 11-9-2016. Submissions made show that she has delivered a child.

¶15

During investigation blood samples of two boys and the present applicant weer sent for D.N.A. test. This Court is avoiding to mention the opinion given in D.N.A. test. But due that opinion this Court holds that it is not desirable to keep the applicant behind the bars till the disposal of the case which is filed against him. The applicant is behind the bars since 11-9-2016.

¶16

3 Application 1302 of 2017

¶17

In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant is to be released on bail in Crime No. crime is registered at CR No.98/2016 in Azad Nagar Police Station, District Dhule for offences punishable under section 376 (i) (n), 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 on his furnishing Personal Bond of Rs.40,000/(Rupees Forty Thousand Only) with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount. The applicant is not to tamper with prosecution witnesses. He is not to commit similar offences. He is not to visit the residential place and its vicinity of the prosecutrix till disposal of the case.

¶18

Sd/-

¶19

(T.V. NALAWADE, J.)

¶20

rsl

Bhushan @ Laxmikant Ashok Wankhede v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhushan @ Laxmikant Ashok Wankhede 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

The State of Maharashtra Vs Sanjay Namdeorao Ingale

Tukaram Kashiram Mali Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dnyaneshwar S/O. Mahadu Bhutkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rafikoddin @ Gudya S/O Shafikoddin Shaikh and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ravi S/O. Shyamsunder Bhokare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ashok S/O. Sadashiv Walhekar Vs the State of Maharashtra