Allowed

Rajendra Vitthal Randive v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC25 Jan 2019BA/254/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants regular bail to a petitioner implicated in a POCOS case involving assault and indecent acts. The court accepted the petitioner's undertaking to stay out of jurisdiction and post a bond of Rs. 15,000.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on executing a PR bond of Rs. 15,000 with one surety, undertaking not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, and to stay away from Pune district jurisdiction.

Rajendra Vitthal Randive Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1/3 Yadav 907.ba.254.19

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 254 OF 2019

¶4

Rajendra Vitthal Randive … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent

¶5

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi for Applicant.

¶6

Mr. A. A. Palkar, APP for Respondent – State.

¶7

CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. DATE : JANUARY 25, 2019.

¶8

P.C. :

¶9

. In Crime No. 427 of 2018 for an offence punishable under

¶10

Sections 325 & 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 9 (m) and 10 of

¶11

the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, the Applicant is seeking regular bail. After the arrest on 27^th August, 2018 the Applicant came to be chargesheeted.

¶12

Based on the investigation, the learned Counsel for Applicant submits that the maximum punishment prescribed is seven years for the offences for which the Applicant is chargesheeted. According to him, the

¶13

2/3 Yadav 907.ba.254.19

¶14

Complainant is wife of the Applicant. According to the Applicant, since relations with wife were not very cordial/comfortable, there appears to be a case of false implication, particularly in the backdrop of earlier N.C. complaints. Based on the statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the victim girl who is daughter of the Applicant, the learned APP sought rejection.

¶15

3. Considered rival submissions.

¶16

No doubt it is true that the Applicant is chargesheeted for an offences wherein the maximum punishment provided is seven years. The fact remains that the victim is a daughter of the Complainant and she has categorically stated about the offence punishable under Section 9 (n) and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The record also depicts that since long the Applicant and the Complainant were not having very comfortable relationship.

¶17

In the aforesaid background, accepting the undertaking given by the learned Counsel for Applicant, on instructions, that the Applicant will stay out of the jurisdiction of the Pune District but for attending the

¶18

3/3 Yadav 907.ba.254.19

¶19

Court proceedings, in my opinion, the Application needs to be allowed. Hence, the following order.

¶20

ORDER

¶21

(A) The Applicant be released on bail in Crime No. 427 of 2018 for an offence punishable under Sections 325 & 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 9 (m) and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act on executing PR Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount.

¶22

(B) The Applicant shall neither tamper the evidence of prosecution nor influence the prosecution witnesses.

¶23

(C) The Applicant shall keep himself away from the revenue jurisdiction of the Pune District till conclusion of trial but for attending the court proceedings.

¶24

Criminal Bail Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶25

(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

Rajendra Vitthal Randive v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Vitthal Randive 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

Shobha Suresh Katke Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vishal Dasharath Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shakuntala Dasharath Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra

Abhijeet Chandrakant Mohite Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahinder Jograj Singh and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Hanmant Ananta Bhosale and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra