Allowed

Akhtaribegam Allauddin Mansuri v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC24 Apr 2019APPA/538/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C., the Bombay High Court suspended the substantive sentence of a female applicant earlier convicted under POCSO and IPC for lack of a charge under Section 16 of POCSO. She was enlarged on bail and provisional cash bail.

What did the court decide?

Suspension of substantive sentence; enlargement on bail with P.R. Bond and sureties; provisional cash bail for six weeks.

Akhtaribegam Allauddin Mansuri Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1 3 APP538 OF 2019 IN APPEAL 540 OF 2019.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.538 OF 2019

¶3

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 540 OF 2019

¶5

Akhtaribegam Allauddin Mansuri

¶6

….Applicant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State of Maharashtra

¶9

Julekha Rasul Mansuri ….Respondents

¶10

Mr. Arun K. Rajput for applicant.

¶11

Mr. S.R. Agarkar for State.

¶12

CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV,J.

¶13

DATE : APRIL 24, 2019.

¶14

P. C. :

¶15

1 Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for State.

¶16

This is an application u/s. 389 of Cr.P.C. The applicant herein is seeking suspension of substantive sentence imposed upon him in Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act in Special Case No. 10/2014 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane vide judgment and order dated 08.03.2019 thereby convicting the appellant for the offence punishable u/s. 347 and 348 of Indian Penal Code and u/s. 4 r/w. Section

¶17

s.m.patil

¶18

2 3 APP538 OF 2019 IN APPEAL 540 OF 2019.doc

¶19

17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶20

The applicant herein happens to be a woman. She could have been convicted only with the aid of Section 16 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. However, it prima facie appears that no charge was framed u/s. 16 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The applicant was on bail during pendancy of trial and would be entitled to the extension of same relief during the pendancy of the appeal. It is made clear that the application filed by the co-accused Allauddin Mansuri shall be considered on its own merits. Prima facie, the applicant herein is being enlarged on bail for want of framing of charge u/s. 16 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.Hence, following order is passed :

¶21

ORDER

¶22

(i). The application is allowed.

¶23

(ii). The substantive sentence imposed upon the applicant vide Judgment and Order dated 08.03.2019 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thane in POCSO Special Case No. 10/2014 is hereby suspended. He be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- and one or more solvent sureties in the like amount.

¶24

(iii). The applicant be enlarged on provisional cash bail of Rs.25,000/- for a period of 6 weeks from today.

¶25

(iv) Upon being released on bail, the applicant shall report to the Court of Special Judge, Thane once in six months on the date assigned by the Learned Sessions Judge.

¶26

s.m.patil

¶27

3 3 APP538 OF 2019 IN APPEAL 540 OF 2019.doc

¶28

(v). Upon failure to attend any two consecutive dates, the Learned Special Judge, Thane shall make a report to the High Court and prosecution will be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail.

¶29

[SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.]

¶30

s.m.patil

Akhtaribegam Allauddin Mansuri v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhtaribegam Allauddin Mansuri v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Jogindersingh @ Zokia Raghubirsingh Chauhan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Srichand T. Rajpal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Amar Ramchandra Dhotre Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Union of India Vs Abdul Rahim Shaikh and Ors.

Manisha Sashikant Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sujoy Ramesh Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra