Allowed

Shivkanya Rambhau Kachare @ Sukanya Dhondaikar v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC24 Sept 2024BA/3484/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application by Accused No.10 in a case of trafficking and sexual exploitation of a minor sold to kala kendras. Court noted serious allegations but granted bail on grounds of speedy trial under Article 21, applicant's age, gender and no antecedents, with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on PR bond of Rs.50,000 with sureties, subject to strict conditions including reporting twice weekly and not entering Solapur district except for trial.

Shivkanya Rambhau Kachare @ Sukanya Dhondaikar… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

905-BA-3484-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

BAIL APPLICATION NO.3484 OF 2024

¶4

Shivkanya Rambhau Kachare alias Sukanya Dhondaikar

¶5

...Applicant

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

Mr. Sajeev P. Kadam a/w Varsha M. Thorat, Pratik Deshmukh & Mayur G. Sanap i/b Prashant P. Raul, for the Applicant. Ms. R. V. Newton, APP, for the Respondent No.1 – State. Ms. Sakshi Mane, for the Respondent No.2.

¶10

CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE: 24 SEPTEMBER 2024

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

Heard Mr. Kadam, learned Counsel for the Applicant,

¶13

Ms. Newton, learned APP for the Respondent No.1-State and Ms.

¶14

Mane, learned Counsel appointed to represent the interest of the Respondent No.2.

¶15

This regular Bail Application is preferred under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“CrPC”). The relevant details are as follows:

¶16

1. C.R. No.	271 of 2023
2. Date of registration of F.I.R.	22/05/2023
3. Name of Police Station	Jodbhavi Peth, District-Solapur
4. Sections invoked	370, 376, 342 r/w 34 of theIPC,

Page No. 1

Arjun

905-BA-3484-2024.doc

		1860; 3, 4, 5 & 6 of theImmoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956; 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 & 17 of thePOCSO Act, 2012; 81 of theJuvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
5.	Date of arrest	09/07/2024
6.	Date of filingof Charge-sheet	12/07/2023
7.	Date of filing of SupplementaryCharge-sheet	August 2024

¶21

As per the prosecution case, as the relations between parents of the victim were not cordial and as there were frequent quarrels between them, they started residing separately from the year 2011. At that time, the victim was only three years old and she resided with her father, who is Accused No.1. It appears that when the victim was 12 years old, Accused No.1 – father sold her to an organisation by the name ‘Jay Malhar Lok Kala Kendra’ in lieu of consideration. It appears that thereafter the victim was sold to five such Lok Kala Kendras by the Accused No.1 – father who accepted consideration for the same. On 17.05.2023 the victim contacted her mother through social media and thereafter the mother lodged a complaint. The victim was rescued and handed over to her mother.

¶22

The present Applicant is Accused No.10. As per the prosecution case, the present Applicant is concerned with ‘Aryabhushan Kala

Page No. 2

Arjun

905-BA-3484-2024.doc

Kendra’. The role attributed to the present Applicant is that she had paid an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the father of the victim and forced the victim to dance in front of other people. It is also the prosecution case that the Applicant had accepted money from various persons and forced the victim to have physical relations with them.

¶27

It is the submission of Mr. Kadam, learned Counsel for the Applicant that investigation is complete and charge-sheet has already been filed. He submitted that the Applicant is a woman and is in jail. Charge is not framed. There are about 33 witnesses in the Chargesheet. Trial will take a considerably long time. The co-accused who had forceful physical relationship with the victim, have been enlarged on bail. It is his submission that the victim in her first statement (Page No. 86) dated 21st May 2023 had stated that the Applicant forced her to dance infront of the customers of the said kala kendra. He submitted that in the said statement, it is stated that one Meena Pargaonkar used to send the victim to different people and those persons used to forcefully have physical relations with the victim. However, same role has not been attributed to the Applicant in the said statement. He submits that in the supplementary statement of the victim dated 24th May 2023 (Page No.87), the victim has stated that the Applicant forced

¶28

the victim to dance in front of the customers. He submits that in the

Page No. 3

Arjun

905-BA-3484-2024.doc

statement (Page Nos.97-98) recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., the victim has levelled allegations against the Applicant and in the said statement, the allegations are made that co-accused – Anita Wagholikar, Chhaya Nerlekar, Poonam Bidkar, Meena Pargaonkar, Dhanure as well as the present Applicant have taken money from the different customers and forced the victim to have physical relationship with those persons. He submitted that there are total 10 Accused and 6 have been released on bail. He submitted that Accused No.9 – Chhaya Nerlekar, Accused No.2 – Anita Wagholikar, and Accused No.7 – Poonam Bidkar having the same role, have been released on bail. Therefore, he submitted that the Applicant may be enlarged on bail. He submits that in any case, investigation is complete and the charge-sheet is filed. There is no progress in the trial and even charge is also not framed. He submits that the Applicant has no antecedents.

¶33

On the other hand, Ms. Newton, learned APP for Respondent No.1-State and Ms. Mane, learned Counsel appointed to represent interest of Respondent No.2 vehemently opposed the Bail Application. Both of them submitted that the material on record shows that father of the victim had been paid from time to time various amounts by the Applicant. Both of them pointed out forensic report of the victim and submitted that same corroborates sexual assault. Both of them,

Page No. 4

Arjun

905-BA-3484-2024.doc

therefore, prayed that the Bail Application be rejected.

¶38

Ms. Mane, learned Counsel appointed to represent interest of

¶39

Respondent No. 2 pointed out Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and submitted that maximum punishment is life imprisonment. She also pointed out Section 29 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘ POCSO ’) providing presumption. She therefore, submitted that the Bail Application be rejected.

¶40

Perusal of the various statements annexed to the charge-sheet show that the offence is very serious and heinous in nature. The victim at the relevant time was about 15 years and 3 months old. The material on record shows that the present Applicant had paid money to the father of the victim and kept her at ‘Aryabhushan Kala Kendra’. The victim was forced to dance infront of the customers of the said Kala Kendra as well as the victim was forced to keep sexual relationship with the various persons.

¶41

However, it is required to be noted that the Applicant is a woman, aged 47 years. The Applicant was arrested on 9th July 2024. The Charge-sheet was filed on 12th July 2023 and the Supplementary Charge-sheet is filed in August 2024. There are about 33 witnesses proposed to be examined by the prosecution as per the charge-sheet. Insofar as the progress of the trial, even charge is also not framed. In

Page No. 5

Arjun

905-BA-3484-2024.doc

this case, there are total 13 accused, out of which, 4 are absconding and no steps are taken by the State of Maharashtra to arrest the said 4 accused. There is nothing on record to show, that steps are taken to bifurcate the trial. Therefore, it is not likely that the trial will conclude within reasonable time.

¶46

Speedy trial is one of the facets of right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Speedy trial is an essential ingredient of “reasonable, fair and just” procedure guaranteed by Article 21 and it is the constitutional obligation of the State to device such a procedure as would ensure speedy trial to the Accused.¹ Therefore, the Applicant is entitled for bail.

¶47

As the offence is very serious and heinous in nature and there is a possibility of the Applicant influencing the witnesses, Mr. Kadam, learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the Applicant will reside at Flat No.8, Nisha Park, Gulmohar Road, Joshi Hospital, Savedi, Ahmednagar.

¶48

The Applicant is a woman aged 47 years.

¶49

The Applicant does not have any criminal antecedents.

¶50

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

¶51

Accordingly, the Applicant can be enlarged on bail by imposing

¶52

strict conditions.

¶53

1 Hussainara Khatoon (IV) v. Home Secy., State of Bihar, (1980) 1 SCC 98

Page No. 6

Arjun

905-BA-3484-2024.doc

16. In view thereof, the following order:

¶58

O R D E R

¶59

(a) The Applicant − Shivkanya Rambhau Kachare alias Sukanya Dhondaikar be released on bail in connection with C. R. No. 271 of 2023 registered with the Jodbhavi Peth Police Station, District - Solapur on her furnishing P. R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one or two local solvent sureties in the like amount;

¶60

(b) The Applicant shall not enter the Solapur district after being released on bail, except for reporting to the Investigating Officer, if called, and for attending the trial.

¶61

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

¶62

(d) The Applicant shall report to the Tofkhana Police Station, District – Ahmednagar twice a week i.e. on every Monday and Friday between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m. till the conclusion of the trial. The Police Inspector of Tofkhana Police Station, District – Ahmednagar to communicate details thereof to the Investigating Officer.

¶63

(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;

¶64

(f) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution

Page No. 7

Arjun

905-BA-3484-2024.doc

evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner;

¶69

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

¶70

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

¶71

The Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶72

It is clarified that the Trial Court shall decide the case on its

¶73

merits, uninfluenced by the prima facie observations made in this order.

¶74

This Court places on record its appreciation of the assistance rendered by Ms. Sakshi Mane, learned Counsel appointed to represent interest of Respondent No.2. The High Court Legal Services Committee, Mumbai is requested to pay her the professional charges as per the rules and her name be included in the panel maintained by the High Court Legal Services Committee, Mumbai.

¶75

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶76

Page No. 8

¶77

Arjun

Shivkanya Rambhau Kachare @ Sukanya Dhondaikar v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivkanya Rambhau Kachare @ Sukanya Dhondaikar 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

Similar cases

Chandrakant Shankar Pawar and 14 Ors. vs Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai and Anr.

Ardeshir Behram Dubash vs State of Maharashtra through Government Pleader, High Court, Bombay

Ratilal Madan Waja vs Rajesh Kumar the Additional Secretary, Revenue Department

Pragma Sra Development LLP vs Shiv Infra Riverwalk LLP

Akshay Sthapathya vs Shiv Infra Riverwalk LLP

Rajesh Kumar vs Union of India