In this criminal bail application, the court rejected the plea for enlargement. The applicant was alleged of sexually assaulting a 4-year-old child. The court held it was not a fit case for bail and expedited the trial.
Bail application rejected; trial expedited.
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.
18-ba.240.2018
1/3
nsc.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.240 OF 2018
Suraj@Surya Mahatham Mandal ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr.M.H.Jahagirdar, for the Applicant
Mr.S.S.Hulke, A.P.P for the Respondent-State.
API – Sachin Suryavanshi, Kherwadi Police Station (Then Dindoshi Police Station, Mumbai)
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
DATE : 24th APRIL, 2018
P.C. :
bail in connection with C.R.No.89 of 2016 registered with the Dindoshi
Police Station, Mumbai, for the alleged offences punishable under Section
376 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
18-ba.240.2018
2/3
complainant- Ramchandra Mandal, (father of the survivor, aged 4 years), the applicant was living in the vicinity and that they were known to each other, since they hailed from Bihar. He has alleged that the incident took place on 4th February, 2016, at about 10.40 p.m. He has alleged that his employer and one lady came with his daughter, aged 4 years; that his daughter, aged 4 years was bleeding, pursuant to which, she was taken to the hospital. He has stated that on questioning his daughter, as to what had happened, she disclosed that the applicant had taken her to his room and had sexually assaulted her. A perusal of the history given by the mother of the survivor also shows that she has stated that the present applicant had sexually assaulted her daughter, aged 4 years at around 10.30 p.m. on 4th February, 2016. She has further stated that her daughter had gone to play and that the applicant had taken her daughter to his house and had forcible sexual relations with her and that she was bleeding from her vagina, pursuant to which, they took her to the hospital and lodged a complaint. The medical history shows that the survivor was referred to higher centre
i.e. Nair Hospital for pediatric surgery opinion, as the patient needed suturing of tear under anesthesia. The statement of the witnesses, who saw
18-ba.240.2018
3/3
the survivor and the applicant, are consistent with the statement of the complainant and the history given by the survivor.
applicant on bail.
of as such. However, considering the age of the victim girl, the trial of the
applicant is expedited.
facie for deciding the aforesaid application, and the learned Judge shall
decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.
(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a criminal case involving sexual assault on a child under Section 376 IPC and POCSO Act.
Whether the case is a fit case for enlargement on bail considering the age of the victim.
Whether the trial should be expedited in view of the victim's age.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Suraj@Surya Mahatham Mandal
The State of Maharashtra
Revati Mohite Dere
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
