Dismissed

Rama Annappa Pawar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC6 Sept 2017BA/1443/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismissed a bail application under Section 439 CrPC filed by Rama Anappa Pawar. The High Court of Judicature at Bombay rejected the bail plea due to the serious nature of the allegations involving abduction of a minor girl to facilitate rape under sections 376 and 366A IPC and the PCSO Act.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; applicant not entitled to be released on bail.

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

1/2

BA.1443-2017

Dond

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

BAIL APPLICATION NO.1443 OF 2017

Rama Anappa Pawar

..Applicant.

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent

¶10

Mr. J.D. Mane for applicant. Mr. A.A. Palkar, APP for State.

¶11

CORAM: A.S. GADKARI, J.

¶12

DATE : 6^th September 2017.

¶13

P.C.

¶14

1] This is an application under Section 439 of Cr. P.C. for bail in CR No.280 of 2016 registered with Vairag Police Station, Taluka-Barshi District-Solapur under Sections 376(2)(i), 366A of the Indian Penal Code

¶15

and under Section 4 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (PCSO Act).

¶16

2] With a view to protect the identity of the victim girl and in consonance with the provisions of Section 228(A) of the Indian Penal Code, detailed narration of facts mentioned in the present application, first

¶17

2/2

¶18

BA.1443-2017

¶19

information report and and in the statements of the witnesses is hereby avoided. The first information report is lodged by the uncle of the victim girl against the applicant.

¶20

3] It is the case of the prosecution that, the applicant along with other accused persons abducted the prosecutrix from the internal road of the village and took her to secluded place and facilitated co-accused Mahadu Deokar to commit rape on her. In the present case, victim girl is aged about 15 years. The report as well as statement of the victim girl unequivocably ascribes the role of abduction to the present applicant with a view to facilitate co-accused Mahadu Deokar to commit offence of rape, from the internal road of the village when prosecutrix had been to answer nature's call. Undoubtedly, the allegations against the applicant are of serious in nature i.e. abduction of a minor girl from road with a view to facilitate the co-accused to commit rape on her.

¶21

3] Considering the facts of the case, serious allegations against

¶22

the applicant and gravity of the offence, this Court is of the view that the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail.

¶23

Application is accordingly dismissed.

Rama Annappa Pawar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rama Annappa 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

Harshal S/O Prabhakar Velapure Vs the State of Maharashtra

Kundalik Santu Rakshe Vs Senior Inspector of Police and Anr.

Prakash @ Narayan Kishan Bhujbal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Akhil Ismail Pingari Vs the State of Maharashtra

Deepak Raju Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sonya @ Nilesh Bhimrao Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra