Allowed

Shivshankar Ramnath Gupta v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC28 Oct 2021BA/730/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application for an applicant accused of sexual assault and kidnapping of a minor. The court noted variance in statements and lack of medical evidence justifying the prosecution case, holding that a case for bail was made out.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail in Crime No. 244 of 2020 by furnishing a surety bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.

Shivshankar Ramnath Gupta Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

44 BA 730.21.doc

¶2

Dusane

¶3

1/3

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

BAIL APPLICATION NO.730 OF 2021

¶6

BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE

¶7

Digitally signed by BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Date: 2021.10.29 15:53:36 +0530

¶8

....
Shivshankar Ramnath GuptaApplicant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The State of Maharashtra ....
Respondent

¶11

Mr. Sandesh B. Manikhedkar i/by Dipika Gupta for Applicant.
Ms. A.A. Takalkar, APP for State.
API, R.B. Momin, Vashi Police Station, Navi Mumbai

¶12

Coram : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.
Date : 28TH OCTOBER, 2021

¶13

P.C.:

¶14

1.After arrest on 6th July, 2020, the applicant came to be

¶15

charge-sheeted for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 354(A),

¶16

341 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012.

¶17

2.The prosecution case against the applicant is, so as to make

¶18

victim’s visit his house, applicant lured her by handing over his mobile

¶19

and make her return the same at his place in late evening. The victim as

¶20

Dusane2/344 BA 730.21.doc

¶21

such went in the night at the place of applicant, where she was
subjected to sexual assault. As such the offence in question.

¶22

3.As far as offence punishable under Sections 363, 353 and
341 of Indian Penal Code are concerned, the applicant has stated to be
next door neighbour of the complainant. The girl in her statement
stated that because of fear of her mother she did not return at late
night hours to her parental home, and stayed to the house of applicant.
Before this event, she roamed around in auto-rickshaw of a person of
acquaintance upto 11.00 pm.

¶23

4.Apart from above, statement recorded under Section 161
Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C. is at great variance. The medical
evidence also does not justify the case of the prosecution of sexual
assault. The offence punishable under Sections 8 and 12 of POCSO Act
Provides for punishment of five years. As such, in my opinion, a case for
grant of bail is made out. The application is allowed on following
conditions :

¶24

Dusane

¶25

3/344 BA 730.21.doc

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

(i)The applicant be released on bail in Crime No. 244 of 2020,
registered at Vashi Police Station, for the offence punishable under
Sections 363, 354(A), 341 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 8 and 12
of POCSO Act, 2012, on furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of 15,000/-
with one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶28

(ii)The applicant shall neither influence the prosecution
witnesses in any manner nor tamper with the evidence.

¶29

(iii)The applicant shall furnish address of his permanent
residence and also furnish his latest contact details to the I.O.

¶30

(iv)The applicant shall remain outside jurisdiction of the
concerned Police Station till conclusion of the trial.

¶31

( NITIN W. SAMBRE, J. )

Shivshankar Ramnath Gupta v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivshankar Ramnath Gupta 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

Jesuwin Cherian and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Pharma Company through Authorized Person Shri, Girish Jaiwal Vs the State of Maharashtra

Balaji Ashok Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Tufail Ahmad H. Rahman Khan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rajeev Udaibhan Singh Vs Seema Rajeev Singh

Sarveshkumar Ramdevan Shahi Vs the State of Maharashtra