Allowed

Vikram Shankar Potdar v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC13 Aug 2024BA/2450/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted to an applicant detained over five years for IPC and POCSO offences in Crime No. 208/2019, Pune, as charge was not framed and no end of trial was in sight; release on PR bond of Rs.25,000 with conditions barring entry into Pune City.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail in Crime No. 208/2019 on PR bond of Rs.25,000 with one solvent surety, with conditions including not entering Pune City till trial concludes.

Vikram Shankar Potdar vs the State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

28-BA-2450-24.DOC

¶2

Sayali Upasani

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2450 OF 2024

¶5

Vikram Shankar Potdar

¶6

...Applicant

¶7

Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents

¶8

Mr. Bharat Gadhari with Pratik Sabrad with Mr. Sarvesh Deshpande i/b Shama Mulla, Advocate for Applicant.

¶9

Mrs. G. P. Mulekar, APP for State-Respondent.

¶10

Mr. Vikrant Shinde, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

¶11

Mr. Saheba Pote, API, Present.

¶12

CORAM:- ANIL S. KILOR, J.

¶13

DATED:- 18^th NOVEMBER, 2024

¶14

PC:-

¶15

Heard.

¶16

By this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 208 of 2019 registered with Vimantal Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 354A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 8, 9(c)(f), 10, 16, 17 and 21 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

¶17

It is pointed out that the applicant was arrested on 16th May, 2019, which shows that the applicant is in jail from last about five years

¶18

1/3

¶19

28-BA-2450-24.DOC

¶20

and half month. As far as the trial is concerned, the charge is not framed despite the mandate of Section 35 of POCSO Act, 2012. The maximum punishment in the present matter will be seven years. Thus, considering the maximum punishment it can be said that the applicant is in jail for the substantive period.

¶21

In the circumstances, as there is no likelihood that the trial will be concluded in near future or in other words there is no end of trial in sight in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Sheikh Javed Iqbal @ Ashraq Ansari @ Javed Ansari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh¹ , I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for grant bail.

¶22

The learned APP while opposing the application has argued that if the applicant is released on bail, he may pressurise the victim or the prosecution witnesses.

¶23

In reply to the same, the learned Counsel of the applicant, on instructions, makes a statement that the applicant is ready to abide by any condition including not to enter into Pune City till the conclusion of the trial.

¶24

In the circumstances, though the learned APP and the learned Counsel for the victim-respondent No. 2 have opposed the application, I pass the following order.

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(i) The Bail Application is allowed;

¶27

(ii) It is directed that the Applicant shall be released on bail in Crime No. 208 of 2019 registered with Vimantal Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 354,

¶28

1 (2024) SCC Online SC 1755

¶29

2/3

¶30

28-BA-2450-24.DOC

¶31

354A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 8, 9(c)(f), 10, 16, 17 and 21 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with one solvent surety in the like amount;

¶32

iii The applicant shall not enter into the territorial jurisdiction of Pune City till the conclusion of the trial except on the date of trial;

¶33

iv. The applicant shall provide his address and name of the nearby police station to the I.O, which he shall attend the said Police Station on 1^st and 16^th day of every month between 10.00 am to 11.00 am, till the conclusion of the trial except on the date of trial;

¶34

v. The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also not tamper with the evidence;

¶35

vi. Liberty is granted to the State to apply cancellation of bail if the applicant commits similar offence.;

¶36

vii. The Applicant shall attend the trial before the Trial Court regularly on every date unless exempted by the Trial Court for any reason.

¶37

viii. Application stands disposed of, accordingly.

¶38

[ANIL S. KILOR, J.]

¶39

3/3

Vikram Shankar Potdar v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikram Shankar Potdar v. the 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rohan Eknath Polekar vs State of Maharashtra

Ajitsingh Satyawan Ladwal vs State of Maharashtra

Sahil Manoj Machare vs State of Maharashtra

Harishchandra Kashinath Bhandare vs the State of Maharashtra

Harshad Hemant Jadhav vs the State of Maharashtra

Balya @Tushar Ashok Mane vs State of Maharashtra