Allowed

Royston Victor Saldanha v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC20 Aug 2018BA/539/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under IPC Section 376, the single-judge High Court examined the prosecution case alleging sexual intercourse. Considering that the applicant and complainant were acquainted and a prima facie case suggested consensual conduct, the court granted bail upon furnishing a bond.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a PR Bond of Rs. 20,000/- with sureties, reporting to police weekly, and not tampering with evidence.

Royston Victor Saldanha Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

1 33-ba-539.18.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 539 OF 2018

¶4

Royston Victor Saldanha … Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶5

Mr. Aabad Ponda i/b Mr. Milan Hebbali for Applicant. Mr. Y. Y. Dabke, APP for the State.

¶6

CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : 20^th AUGUST, 2018.

¶7

P. C.:

¶8

This is an application for bail in connection with C.R.No.246 of 2017 registered with Samata Nagar Police Station, Mumbai for

¶9

offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed.

¶10

The prosecution case is that the applicant and the complainant were acquainted with each other. In the FIR it is alleged that on 5^th June, 2017, the applicant-accused gave a telephonic call to the complainant and she was informed that computer job is available for her. On 6^th June, 2017, the complainant visited the house of accused at Kandivali. She

1 of 5

Shridhar Sutar

2 33-ba-539.18.doc

informed her sister about her visit to the house of accused. The complainant also told her sister Alisha to come and pick her after some time. The accused thereafter switched off the light and forcefully had sexual intercourse with the complainant on two to three occasions. Complainant came below building when her sister Alisha was waiting for her. She narrated incident to her family. The FIR was lodged on 7^th June, 2017.

¶15

Learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that the complainant is major. The circumstance clearly indicates that there was relationship between the complainant and the applicant-accused. It is further submitted that the complainant has stated in her statement before Magistrate that she called her sister Alisha to pick her from applicant's home, whereas, sister's statement indicate that she repeatedly made calls and therefore after some time complainant called her to pick her up. Alisha had stated that she and one Nilesh went to pick her up where Nilesh made repeated calls and asked applicant's address where she replied of not knowing flat and building number. It is further submitted that Nilesh had demanded Rs.50,000/- from applicant which is apparent from text messages stating that the victim had

2 of 5

Shridhar Sutar

3 33-ba-539.18.doc

disclosed him the incident mentions that the complainant had informed them not to come immediately. Learned Counsel also relied upon the CCTV footage, which according to him indicates that the prosecutrix showed cool and calm comforrt while leaving building. It is submitted that there was relationship between them. It is submitted that the said text messages and the CCTV footage was handed over to the investigating officer during the course of investigation. It is submitted that taking the alleged act to be true, the circumstances indicate that it was consensual. It is submitted that the applicant is in custody since last one year. The investigation has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed.

¶20

Learned APP submitted that overt act has been attributed to the applicant by first informant. She has stated that the applicant has sexually assaulted her on three occasions on the date of incident. It is submitted that the evidence on record establishes the complicity of the applicant in the said crime. At this stage version of complainant cannot be brushed aside.

¶21

I have perused the statement of the complainant and the witnesses. The messages exchanged between both the parties

3 of 5

Shridhar Sutar

4 33-ba-539.18.doc

which are annexed to the application shows that the complainant and the accused were acquainted with each other. The messages indicate that they were in relationship. It is alleged that when the complainant had visited the house of accused, the accused has forcefully committed intercourse with the complainant two to three times. I have also perused the statement of the sister and mother of the complainant. The investigation is completed and the charge-sheet is filed. The applicant is in custody for about one year. On perusal of evidence on record and the documents annexed to this application, it appears that complainant and applicant-accused were acquainted with each other and the alleged act appears to be consensual. In these circumstances bail can be granted to the applicant.

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

(i) Criminal Bail Application No.539 of 2018 is allowed.

¶28

(ii) The applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R.No. 246 of 2017 registered with Samata Nagar Police Station at Mumbai, which is the subject matter of Sessions Case No.308 of 2017. The

¶29

Shridhar Sutar

¶30

5 33-ba-539.18.doc

¶31

applicant be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.20,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶32

(iii) The applicant shall report Samata Nagar Police Station, Mumbai once in fortnight on saturday between 10.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon till further orders.

¶33

(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence.

¶34

The criminal application stands disposed of.

¶35

( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

¶36

Shridhar Digitally signed byShridhar Marutirao Marutirao Sutar Date: 2018.08.24 Sutar 11:57:03 +0530

¶37

5 of 5

¶38

Shridhar Sutar

Royston Victor Saldanha v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Royston Victor Saldanha 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

Mukeshbhai Balabhai Patel and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mukesh Popatlal Gada Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vinit Ramkrishna Mahajan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mohd. Asif Niyaz Siddiqui Vs the State of Maharasthra

Nilam Ramesh Doshi Vs the State of Maharashtra

Nihal Idris Shaikh and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra