Dismissed

Suraj Vyankat Suryavanshi v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC21 Jul 2022BA/2918/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court rejected a bail application in a case involving a 20-year-old accused alleged to have had physical relations with a 14-year-old victim. The court held that consent is immaterial when the victim is under 15 and noted circumstantial evidence suggesting coercion.

What did the court decide?

Application for bail rejected. Trial ordered to be concluded expeditiously; bail may be sought again if trial exceeds the specified timeline.

Suraj Vyankat Suryavanshi Vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

SWAROOP Digitally signedby SWAROOP SHARAD SHARAD PHADKE PHADKE Date: 2022.07.2117:48:08 +0530

¶2

44 ba 2918 of 2021.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2918 OF 2021

¶4

…
Suraj Vyankat Suryavanshi Applicant
versus

¶5

The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …Respondents

¶6

Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam, for Applicant.
Mrs. J.S.Lohakare, APP, for State.
Mr. Madan J. Gupta, appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2.

¶7

CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J.

¶8

RESERVED ON : 1st JULY, 2022
PRONOUNCED ON : 21st JULY, 2022

¶9

P.C.

¶10

1. The Applicant, who is arraigned in C.R.No.593 of 2020 registered with
Vimantal Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian
Penal Code and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act,
2012, has preferred this Application for bail.

¶11

2. The indictment against the Applicant runs as under :

¶12

The first informant – Respondent No.2 resides at Vadgaon Shinde Road,
Lohagaon. His elder daughter was 14 years and 7 months of age and studying in 9th
standard. On 27th October, 2020 at about 6.00 p.m. when the first informant and his
wife returned to home, elder daughter (victim) was not at home. The first informant
went in search of victim in the adjacent field. A boy informed him that victim was
seen with the Applicant. The first informant asked his son to look for victim at the

¶13

SSP 1/7

¶14

44 ba 2918 of 2021.doc

¶15

house of the Applicant. While victim’s brother was on his way to the house of the
Applicant, he found victim on Vadagaon Shinde Road. When the victim was brought
back home, she seemed terrified. She did not disclose anything. On 28th October,
2020, after being taken in confidence, victim opened up. Victim disclosed that she
had known the Applicant since a year prior to the occurrence. On the previous day,
while the first informant and his wife had gone to shopping, the Applicant came in
front of her house and took her to the field of Mr. Kakade. The Applicant allegedly
took her to an under construction site and had physical relations with her, without her
consent. Hence, the first informant lodged a report on 9th November, 2020.

¶16

3.The Applicant came to be apprehended on 14th November, 2020. Post
completion of investigation, charge sheet has been lodged.

¶17

4.I have heard Mr. Nikam, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mrs.
Lohakare, learned APP for the State and Mr. Madan J. Gupta, learned Counsel
appointed to espouse the cause of the Respondent No.2.

¶18

5.Mr. Nikam, learned Advocate for the Applicant strenuously submitted
that the alleged incident has its genesis in the affair between the Applicant and the
victim. Mr. Nikam would urge that the case is one of the adolescent experimentation.
The Applicant had barely completed 18 years of age on the date of the alleged
occurrence. The victim, though below 15 years of age, has not stated that the
Applicant had forcible physical relations with her. In the circumstances, the Applicant

¶19

SSP 2/7

¶20

44 ba 2918 of 2021.doc

¶21

deserves exercise of discretion. He placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in
the case ofSunil Mahadev Patil V/s. The State of Maharashtra1 wherein the

¶22

considerations which ought to weigh with the Court in exercise of discretion in such
cases, were enunciated.

¶23

6.As against this, the learned APP stoutly submitted that the Applicant
cannot take refuge in the alleged consensual nature of the act. Since the prosecutorix
had not completed even 15 years of age, the aspect of consent becomes wholly
immaterial.

¶24

7.Mr. Gupta, learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 supplemented the
submission of the learned APP and urged that in the light of the material on record
where the statement of the victim is supported by her parents and medical evidence,
the Applicant does not deserve exercise of discretion. Reliance was sought to be
placed on the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of Aparna Bhat & Ors. V/
s. State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr.2 to underscore the approach expected of the Court
in sexual offences against women.

¶25

8. The fact that the Applicant was 18 years and two months old at the time
of the alleged occurrence, persuaded me to give anxious consideration to the rival
submissions and minutely examine the material on record especially the statements of

¶26

the victim recorded before the police and the learned Magistrate under Section 164 of

¶27

1 2015 3 AIR Bom R (Cri) 594

¶28

2 2021 Cri. L.J. 2281

¶29

SSP 3/7

¶30

44 ba 2918 of 2021.doc

¶31

the Code, 1973.

¶32

9.To begin with, prima facie, the act to which the victim was allegedly
subjected to is borne out by the material on record. It also appears incontrovertible
that the victim was about 14 years and 7 months of age. In this backdrop, prima facie
appreciation of the attendant circumstances, is warranted.

¶33

10.In her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code before the
Magistrate, the victim stated that she had known the Applicant since a year prior to
the occurrence. They were in love. On 27th October, 2020 she met the Applicant in
the field adjacent to her house. She was to return to her home within 5-10 minutes.
However, she noticed her father searching for her. She and the Applicant, therefore,
concealed their presence in the bushes. As the evening set in, she and the Applicant
went to a construction site. The Applicant had physical relations with her thereat.
Thereafter, the Applicant asked his brother to drop her at home. On the way, she met
her brother and returned home.

¶34

11.Mr. Nikam, in the light of the aforesaid statement, would urge that the
conduct of the Applicant in asking his brother to drop the victim at her house, shows
that the Applicant cared for the victim. As the Applicant and the victim were in a
relationship and the Applicant was also of tender age, prima facie, an inference of
forcible physical relations cannot be drawn, urged Mr. Nikam.

¶35

12.Per contra, the learned APP and the learned Counsel for the Respondent

¶36

SSP 4/7

¶37

44 ba 2918 of 2021.doc

¶38

No.2 invited the attention of the Court to the history recorded by the medical officer
as per the narration of the victim. The medical officer noted that the victim narrated
that the Applicant had non consensual, forceful and unprotected intercourse.

¶39

13.At this juncture and in the light of the facts, I deem it superfluous to
delve deep into the aspect of the forcible or consensual nature of the alleged act. Since
the victim had not completed even 15 years of age, the question of consent becomes
immaterial. What has to be considered is whether the victim possessed sufficient
maturity of understanding to even know the nature and consequences of the act, she
was indulging in. Can it be said, albeit prima facie, that the victim had voluntarily
surrendered to the desire of the Applicant out of love and affection towards the
Applicant. The attendant circumstances assume critical significance.

¶40

14.Prima facie, it appears that the Applicant and the victim concealed their
presence after noticing the father of the victim. Mr. Sunny Abhange, a witness whose
statement came to be recorded under Section 164 of the Code, states that he had seen
the Applicant along with a girl in the bushes. Upon being enquired as to why he was
there at such late hours, the Applicant simply replied that he would leave.

¶41

15.In the aforesaid circumstances, the fact that despite having known that
the father of the victim was in search of the victim and they were seen by a witness,
the Applicant took the victim to the construction site. The victim was allegedly scared
as her father was looking for her. In such perturbed state of mind, a fourteen and half

¶42

SSP 5/7

¶43

44 ba 2918 of 2021.doc

¶44

year old girl, can hardly be imputed with the maturity of understanding to voluntarily
surrender herself to the physical desire of the Applicant. If viewed through the prism
of aforesaid circumstances, the act on the part of the Applicant, prima facie, appears
to be an instance of overpowering of lust over love and care. The subsequent conduct
of the Applicant in asking his brother to drop the victim at her home, strenuously
pressed into service by Mr. Nikam, therefore, does not dilute the complicity of the act
of the Applicant. I am persuaded to take the aforesaid view also for the reason that the
facts do not prima facie present a situation where the Applicant and the victim were
together for hours and days and it could be urged that one thing led to another. In the
case at hand, on the contrary, there is material to indicate that the father of the victim
was on her trail and another witness had admonished the Applicant. Yet, the Applicant
had the audacity to deflower the victim.

¶45

16.For the foregoing reasons, I am not persuaded to exercise the discretion
in favour of the Applicant.

¶46

17.However, the fact that the Applicant is 20 years of age and continued
incarceration as an under trial prisoner would jeopardize his life and career are the
matters which cannot be lost sight of. A direction for expeditious commencement and
conclusion of the trial, thus, seems in order. If the trial is not concluded within a
reasonable time, it may be expedient to allow the Applicant to revive the prayer for
bail.

¶47

SSP 6/7

¶48

44 ba 2918 of 2021.doc

¶49

18. Hence, the following order :

¶50

ORDER

¶51

(i)The Application stands rejected.

¶52

(ii)The Special Judge who is seized of the matter arising out of
C.R.No.593 of 2020 registered with Vimantal Police Station, Pune, is requested to
commence the trial in the said case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible
and preferably on or before 31st May, 2023.

¶53

(iii)The Applicant shall render necessary co-operation for the
expeditious conclusion of the trial and shall not seek adjournments.

¶54

(iv)In the event the trial is not completed by 31st May, 2013, the
Applicant shall be at liberty to revive the prayer for bail.

¶55

(v)By way abundant caution, it is clarified that the observations

¶56

hereinabove are confined to the consideration of the entitlement for bail and they may
not be construed as an expression of opinion on the guilt or otherwise of the applicant.

¶57

( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )

¶58

SSP 7/7

Suraj Vyankat Suryavanshi v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Vyankat Suryavanshi 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Bhatt and Anr. Vs Rainbow Constructions and 4 Ors.

Qbe Uk Limited (Formerly Known as Qbe Insurance (Europe) Limited) and 9 Ors. Vs Sale Proceeds of Pfs Courage (Imo No. 9428566) and Anr.

Qbe Uk Ltd. (Formerly Known as Qbe Insurance (Europe) Ltd.) and 6 Ors. Vs Sale Proceeds of Pfs Supplier and Another

Pilya @ Mahesh Ananda Parche Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pilya @ Mahesh Ananda Parche Vs the State of Maharashtra

Deelight Fortune Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.