Dismissed

Vinod S/O Vitthal Varabhe @ Telya Vinyababa v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Pulgaon Dist.Wardha and Another

Bombay HC13 Jun 2022APEAL/233/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, dismissed the criminal appeal and rejected the bail application. The court found a strong prima facie case for serious offences including those under the POCSO Act and SC/ST Act (excluding specific AT sections). Consequently, bail was denied to prevent witness influence.

What did the court decide?

Declaration that none of the grounds taken in the memo of appeal are sustainable in law and dismissal of the appeal.

Vinod S/O Vitthal Varabhe @ Telya Vinyababa Vs State of Mah… — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

1/3

¶2

1306apeal233.22

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.233 OF 2022

¶5

(Vinod s/o Vitthal Varabhe @ Telya Vinyababa vs. State of Maharashtra and
another)

¶6

________________________________________________________________________
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶7

Shri M.J. Khan, Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent no.1.

¶8

 CORAM: SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
 G.A. SANAP, JJ.
 DATED : JUNE 13, 2022

¶9

Heard Shri Khan, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.1. Nobody
is present for the appellant and the respondent no.2/
informant.

¶10

2)We have gone through the memo of
appeal and copy of charge-sheet filed along with this
appeal. On going through the first information
report and the statements of witnesses, we are of the
view that there is a strong prima facie case made out
against the appellant for the offences registered
against him except for the offences punishable under
Sections 3(1) and (2) of the Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989, and the remaining offences including the
offences punishable under Sections 6 and 12 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,

¶11

1306apeal233.22

¶12

2/3

¶13

2012 are serious in nature and considering the
conditions in which prosecutrix presently is, it may
not be appropriate to grant bail to the appellant, lest
there is a possibility of the appellant making an
attempt to influence the prosecution witnesses.

¶14

3)Of course, the appellant has averred in
the memo of appeal that the learned Sessions Judge
has passed the impugned order without considering
the factual and legal aspects of the matter and that
all the allegations made in the first information
report are false and do not attract in any way any of
the offences registered against the appellant, but if
we go through the allegations made in the first
information report and also statements of witnesses,
which are very specific in nature, we find that all the
serious offences are prima facie made out against the
appellant.

¶15

4)The appellant has also submitted through
his memo of appeal that there is no need for the
appellant to be kept in Jail and there is no possibility
of the appellant tampering the prosecution evidence.
We have already found prima facie involvement of
the appellant in committing of serious offences and
whenever offences committed are prima facie serious
in nature, there is always a possibility of the accused
to influence the prosecution witnesses and even
avoid trial.

¶16

1306apeal233.22

¶17

3/3

¶18

5)Thus, we find that none of the grounds
taken in the memo of appeal is sustainable in law.
There is no merit in the appeal. The appeal stands
dismissed.

¶19

JUDGE

¶20

 JUDGE

¶21

khj

¶22

Digitally Signed By:KAMAL HUNDRAJ JESWANI Signing Date:15.06.2022 11:28

Vinod S/O Vitthal Varabhe @ Telya Vinyababa v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Pulgaon Dist.Wardha and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod S/O Vitthal Varabhe @ Telya Vinyababa v. State of Mah. Thr. Pso Ps Pulgaon Dist.Wardha and Another

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

Akshay S/O Vinayak Palaspagar Vs State of Mah., Thr. P.S.O. Ps Nandgaon Khandeshwar Tah.Nandgaon Khandeshwar Distamravati and Anoth

State of Mah. Thru. Pso Warora Vs Youraj S/O Dayal Meshram

Vaibhav S/O Sudam Borkar Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso, Police Station Frezarpura, Dist. Amravati and Another

Abdul Raheman Abdul Bashir Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary Home Department (Prison), Mantralaya, MUMBAI-32 and 2 Othr

State of Mah.Thr. Pso Ps Akot Gramin Dist.Akola Vs Firoz Khan Akbar Khan and 3 Others

Sanjay S/O Ramdas Borkar Vs State of Mah. Thr. Pso, Ps, Ajani, Nagpur.