Allowed

Baliram Dagdu Bhokare v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC23 Jan 2023IA/3520/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail pending appeal to the applicant convicted under s. 354-A IPC and POCSO Act. The court noted the short sentence, applicant's seniority, prior bail, and likelihood of delayed appeal disposal as factors justifying interim release on bond.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs. 30,000 with one or two sureties in like amount.

Baliram Dagdu Bhokare Vs State of Maharashtra… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

14-IA-3520-22-IN-APEAL-1029-22.odt

¶2

1 / 4

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3520 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1029 OF 2022

¶5

Baliram Dagdu Bhokare.... Applicant

¶6

versus

¶7

State of Maharashtra & Anr..... Respondents

¶8

Mr. Ratnesh M. Dube (Appointed) Advocate for Applicant.

¶9

Smt. M. R. Tidke, APP for the State/Respondent No.1.

¶10

Mr. Vaibhav V. Ugle (Appointed) Advocate for Respondent No.2.

¶11

CORAM: SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE: 23rd JANUARY, 2023

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

MANUSHREE V NESARIKAR

¶14

Digitally signed by MANUSHREE V NESARIKAR Date: 2023.01.25 16:04:25 +0530

¶15

1. This is an application for bail pending Applicant’s
Appeal. The Applicant was convicted for commission of offence
punishable u/s 354-A(1)(i) of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 8
of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012
and u/s 3(1)(w)(j) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. The

¶16

Nesarikar

¶17

2 / 4 14-IA-3520-22-IN-APEAL-1029-22.odt

¶18

major punishment imposed on him was for three years besides
imposition of fine.

¶19

2. Heard Mr. Ratnesh M. Dube, learned counsel for the
Applicant, Mr. Vaibhav V. Ugle, learned counsel for the
Respondent No.2 and Smt. M. R. Tidke, learned APP for the
State.

¶20

3. Learned counsel for Applicant submitted that the

¶21

incident allegedly took place on 12/01/2018 in a shop, which
was surrounded by other shops. It was a crowded locality.
Nobody had seen the victim going to the shop of the Applicant.
There is no corroboration to the evidence of the victim. There
was monetary dispute between the Applicant and the victim’s
family. Therefore, he is falsely implicated. The Applicant was on
bail during trial and he has not misused the said liberty. He is a
senior citizen. Even after his conviction, he was granted bail u/s
389 of Cr.P.C.

¶22

3 / 4 14-IA-3520-22-IN-APEAL-1029-22.odt

¶23

4. Learned APP as well as the Respondent No.2 opposed
this application. They submitted that the victim’s age is not in
dispute. She was a minor. The Applicant had taken advantage of
the situation and committed this offence. The offence was
committed in the shop. There could not be any eyewitness to the
incident.

¶24

5. I have considered these submissions. The issues raised
by both the sides will have to be considered at the final hearing
stage. The sentence imposed on the Applicant is short. He is a
senior citizen. There are no allegations of misuse of liberty. Even
after his conviction, he was granted bail u/s 389 of Cr.P.C. for a
temporary period. The Appeal is not likely to be decided within
the period of three years.

¶25

6. Considering this situation, the Applicant can be
granted bail pending Appeal.

¶26

7. Hence, the following order :

¶27

14-IA-3520-22-IN-APEAL-1029-22.odt

¶28

4 / 4

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

(i) During pendency and final disposal of the Criminal Appeal No.1029 of 2022, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only), with one or two sureties in the like amount.

¶31

(ii) The Applicant shall not harass the victim or her family in any manner.

¶32

(iii) Interim Application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶33

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

Baliram Dagdu Bhokare v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baliram Dagdu Bhokare v. 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

Vishnumurti Venkatnarsayya Bairi Vs State of Maharashtra

Faizal a Wahid Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.

Raju Harishchandra Longale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Santosh Baban Bagal Vs State of Maharashtra

Namdev @ Shrikant Pandurang Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Surendra Govind Nemivant Vs Sharmishta R. Deshpande