Allowed

Sagar @ Shrikrishna Arjun Avghade v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC1 Mar 2024BA/329/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in Crim. Bail Application No. 329 of 2024 granted bail to the applicant accused of sexual offenses. The court noted a three-year delay in the trial and lack of framed charges as factors justifying release on surety bonds with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000 with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount, subject to various conditions.

Sagar @ Shrikrishna Arjun Avghade Vs State of Maharashtra… — Caste Atrocities | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

911 BA 329.24.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.329 OF 2024

¶4

Sagar alias Shrikrishna Arjun Avghade

¶5

...Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

Mr. Ranjit Patil i/by Ms.Priyanka Gupta and Mr. Rupesh Zade,
Advocate/s for the Applicant.
Ms. S. S. Kaushik, APP for Respondent- State.
Mr. Sachin Gite for Respondent No.2.
Police Naik - Ms. Nilam Santosh Raskar, Dahiwadi Police Station,
Satara, present.

¶10

CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED : 1st March 2024

¶11

P. C.

¶12

1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant, Ms.

¶13

Kaushik, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State and Mr. Gite,

¶14

learned Counsel appointed to represent the interests of Respondent
No.2.

¶15

2. This regular Bail Application is preferred under Section 439 of the

¶16

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The relevant details are as follows:-

¶17

`1. C.R. No.`	`419 of 2020`
`2. Date of registration of F.I.R.`	`15`^th`October 2020`
`3. Name of Police Station`	`Dahiwadi, District-Satara`
`4. Section/s invoked`	`354A, 354C, 376(1) ofIndian` `Penal Code, 1860;`
	`3(1)(w)(i) and 3(1)(w)(ii) of`

¶18

1/5

¶19

Dusane

¶20

911 BA 329.24.doc

¶21

	`theScheduled Castes and the` `Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of` `Atrocities) Act, 1989`
`5. Date of incident`	`12`^th`October 2020`
`6. Date of arrest`	`16`^th`October 2020`
`7. Date of filing Charge-sheet`	`14`^th`December 2020`

¶22

3.As per the prosecution case, the Applicant and the victim started
chatting on WhatsApp for about two months prior to the incident in
question. During the said WhatsApp conversation, the Applicant told the
victim his name as Suraj Dattatray Nale. The Applicant has concealed
his real name as well as his caste. On 12th October 2020, the victim
received a call from the Applicant and thereafter both of them met at a
certain place and both of them went on the two-wheeler vehicle of the
victim to a secluded place. At that place, after some time, some
altercation took place between them and it is the allegation in the
complaint that the Applicant has sexually assaulted the victim. It is also
stated in the F.I.R. that at that time, Accused No.2 - Pappu alias Amol
Kharat arrived at the said spot and started clicking their photographs.
He also started touching the victim and even as per the F.I.R., the
Applicant apprehended the same and the Applicant immediately took
the victim and reached at her village.

¶23

4. Mr. Patil, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submitted

¶24

that this is a case where the friendship developed between the Applicant

¶25

2/5

¶26

Dusane

¶27

911 BA 329.24.doc

¶28

and victim through WhatsApp chats and they met personally on 12th
October 2020. He contended that the relationship is consensual. He
submitted that even the medical evidence also supports his said
contention. He submitted that the Applicant is in custody since 16th
October 2020 and there is no progress in the trial and even the Charge
is not framed yet.

¶29

5.On the other hand, Ms. Kaushik, learned A.P.P. and Mr. Gite,
learned Counsel appointed to represent the interest of the Respondent
No.2 submitted that although there were previous WhatsApp chats
between the Applicant and the victim, both of them personally met on
the very day on which day the incident took place. They submitted that
medical evidence shows that there is an abrasion. They submitted that
the other contents of the medical evidence supports the case of the
prosecution. Both of them submitted that in fact the Applicant has
called his friends at the same place and he has clicked photographs and
therefore, bail be not granted.

¶30

6.Perusal of the record shows that the incident in question took
place on 12th October 2020, the F.I.R. was registered after 3 days i.e. on
15th October 2020 and the Applicant was apprehended on 16th
October 2020. The Applicant is in custody for about 3 years and 4
months. There is no progress in the trial and even the Charge is not
framed yet. As per the Charge-sheet, there are 24 witnesses proposed to

¶31

3/5

¶32

Dusane

¶33

911 BA 329.24.doc

¶34

be examined by the prosecution. The trial is likely to take a considerably

¶35

long time.

¶36

7. The Applicant is a young person aged 22 years and he is a student.

¶37

8. The Applicant does not appear to be at risk of flight.

¶38

9. The Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents.

¶39

10.Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by imposing
conditions. In view thereof, the following order:-

¶40

O R D E R

¶41

(a)The Applicant-Sagar alias Shrikrishna Arjun Avghade be
released on bail in connection with C. R. No.419 of 2020 registered
with the Dahiwadi Police Station, District - Satara on his furnishing
P. R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solventsureties in the
like amount.

¶42

(b)On being released on bail, the Applicant shall furnish his
cell phone number and residential address to the Investigating
Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change
thereto.

¶43

(c)The Applicant shall report to the Dahiwadi Police Station,
District-Satara on the Sunday of every week between 11.00 a.m.
and 1.00 p.m. until the conclusion of the trial.

¶44

(d) The Applicant shall not enter Taluka Phaltan,District-

¶45

4/5

¶46

Dusane

¶47

911 BA 329.24.doc

¶48

Satara.

¶49

(e)The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the case, so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing
the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.

¶50

(f)The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any
prosecution witnesses in any manner.

¶51

(g)The Applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The Applicant
shall co-operate with the Trial Court and shall not seek
unnecessary adjournments thereat.

¶52

(h)The Applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the
Investigating Officer.

¶53

11.The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶54

12.It is clarified that the observations made herein are prima facie,
and the trial Court shall decide the case on its merits, uninfluenced by
the observations made in this Order.

¶55

13.This Court places on record its appreciation for the valuable
assistance rendered by Mr. Sachin Gite, the learned Counsel
representing the interest of the Respondent No.2.

¶56

BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE

¶57

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶58

Digitally signed by BHALCHANDRA GOPAL DUSANE Date: 2024.03.01 20:10:23 +0530

¶59

5/5

¶60

Dusane

Sagar @ Shrikrishna Arjun Avghade v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagar @ Shrikrishna Arjun Avghade 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

Sagarnil Sukumar Sarkar Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ganesh Ashok Nandgaonkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashish Shivaji Kamble Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kanjur Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. (Federal) vs the State of Maharashtra

Deepali Chittranjan Nivargi and Ors. vs Chittaranjan Gopalrao Nivrgi

Shashikant Pratap Kaakade Vs State of Maharashtra