Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Dr. Sunil S/O. Balasaheb Pote vs The State Of Maharashtra on 30 April, 2019

Author: V.K. Jadhav

Bench: V.K. Jadhav

                                   1                   BA 470.2019+.odt

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                   BAIL APPLICATION NO.470 OF 2019

                RAJENDRA KASHINATH SAVANT
                             VERSUS
                 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                 ...
        Advocate for Applicant : Mr R S Shinde h/f Chatterji
                             Joydeep
              APP for Respondent : Mr S G Karlekar
                                 ...

                               WITH
                  BAIL APPLICATION NO. 479 OF 2019

                    NAIMODDIN S/O RAFIQ SHAIKH
                                 VERSUS
                     THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.
                                    ...
                   Mr V D Sapkal advocate for applicant.
                   Mr. S G Karlekar APP for respondent.
                                    ...

                               WITH
                  BAIL APPLICATION NO.504 OF 2019

                   DR. SUNIL S/O BALASAHEB POTE
                                VERSUS
                    THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.
                                  ...
               Mr S.G. Ladda advocate for the applicant.
               Mr. S G Karlekar APP for respondent State.
                                  ...
                      CORAM : V.K. JADHAV, J.
                        Dated: April 30, 2019
                                  ...




     aaa/-




::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019                 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2019 00:54:28 :::
                                      2                  BA 470.2019+.odt

     PER COURT :-

     1.               The applicants in all these bail applications

     are seeking regular bail in connection with Crime

     No.0011 of 2019 registered with Osmanpura Police

     Station, District Aurangabad for the offences punishable

     under sections 315, 201, 417, and 34 of IPC, u/s 23 of

     PCPNDT Act, u/s 27, 37, 33, 41 of Medical Practitioners

     Act and u/s 27(B) (2), 18 © of Drugs and Cosmetics Act

     and u/s 5 (2) (3) (4) of Medical Termination of Pregnancy

     Act. Their applications with similar prayer bearing Bail

     petition no.659/2019, 724/2019 and 647/2019 came to

     be rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,

     Aurangabad.



     2.               Learned counsel for the applicants submits

     that Dr. Amarjyoti Jayant Shinde has lodged the report

     alleging therein that as per the secret information, on

     22.1.2019 at about 13.00 hours she alongwith other

     staff      members        of   the   Municipal       Corporation,

     Aurangabad effected sting operation in one 'Pratyaya

     Apartment, Osmanpura. When they knocked the door of


     aaa/-




::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019                  ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2019 00:54:28 :::
                                     3                  BA 470.2019+.odt

     the room in said apartment, one woman had opened the

     door.       They shown her search warrant.              Then she

     knocked the door of inside room.          One Kalyani Gore

     opened the door of the closed room from inside.                   She

     had disclosed to them that she is pregnant of three and

     half months and was brought there by her relatives for

     sex determination of foetus. Even, said team had found

     one ultra-sound Sonography Machine and one prob.

     Said victim had disclosed that co-accused Suraj Rana

     had accepted certain amount for the sex determination

     by testing it on unauthorized Sonography Machine.



     3.               Learned counsel for the applicant in BA

     No.504 of 2019 submits that, name of the applicant is

     not mentioned in the FIR, however, during the course of

     the investigation, certain pills came to be recovered from

     his clinic.         Those pills are used for the purpose of

     abortion.         The applicant came to be arrested on the

     basis of the disclosure made by co-accused Dr. Rana.

     There is no material at all to invoke section 315 of the

     IPC.      Penal provisions of section 315 of the IPC are


     aaa/-




::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019                 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2019 00:54:28 :::
                                     4                  BA 470.2019+.odt

     attracted if the act done with intent to prevent child

     being born alive or to cause it to die after birth. In the

     instant case, admittedly, the child is very much alive in

     the womb. There is no material against the applicant to

     invoke the provisions of Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal

     Diagnostic Techniques, Act 1994 (for short PCPNDT

     Act). There is no criminal history. The applicant has a

     fixed place of residence. He has his own clinic. He is

     easily available for trial. He may be released on bail.



     4.               The learned counsel for the applicant in BA

     No. 479 of 2019 submits that name of the present

     applicant came to be disclosed by co-accused Dr. Suraj

     Rana. Name of the applicant is not mentioned in the

     FIR, nor any specific role has been attributed to him.

     The applicant is not a medical practitioner. It has been

     alleged that the applicant runs a hospital named and

     styled as 'New Life Hospital,' Aurangabad and he used

     to send patients for sonography to other doctors. There

     is no evidence to that effect.       The applicant may be

     released on bail.


     aaa/-




::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019                 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2019 00:54:28 :::
                                      5                     BA 470.2019+.odt



     5.               The learned counsel for the applicant in BA

     No.470 of 2019 submits that, the applicant is not

     involved in the sex determination of the victim Kalyani's

     foetus and even the provisions of Section 315 of IPC are

     not attracted because foetus is still alive. The applicant

     is a Lab Technician. The applicant has been arrested

     solely on the basis of the statement of co-accused Rana.

     There is nothing else to connect him with the alleged

     crime.       The applicant is handicapped to the extent of

     40% in the form of loss of vision. The applicant may be

     released on bail.



     6.               Learned APP has strongly resisted all the

     applications on the ground that, prima facie, there is

     strong       evidence     against   all   the    applicants.          The

     applicants were assisting co-accused Dr. Suraj Rana.

     Co-accused Suraj Rana used to carry out the sex

     determination test illegally. These applicants were

     assisting him in the manner as revealed during the

     course of the investigation. The applicants may not be



     aaa/-




::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019                     ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2019 00:54:28 :::
                                     6                   BA 470.2019+.odt

     released on bail.



     7.               On going through the allegations made in the

     complaint and on perusal of the charge-sheet, prima

     facie, it appears that the applicants can hardly be

     connected with the offence punishable under section

     315 of IPC. So far as the other offences alleged to have

     been committed by them are concerned, those offences

     are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

     Investigation is over and charge sheet has been

     submitted. All the applicants are having fixed place of

     residence and they are easily available for trial. Their

     further detention is unwarranted and uncalled for.

     Thus, considering the entire aspect of the case and

     considering the role ascribed to each of the applicants, I

     am inclined to grant bail to them on certain conditions.

     Hence, following order.

                                 ORDER

1. Bail application Nos.470 of 2019, 479 of 2019 and 504 of 2019 are hereby allowed.

2. The applicant Rajendra Kashinath Savant in aaa/-

::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2019 00:54:28 :::

7 BA 470.2019+.odt Bail application No.470 of 2019, Naimoddin s/o Rafiq Shaikh in Bail application No.479 of 2019 and the applicant Dr.Sunil Balasaheb Pote in Bail application No.504 of 2019 in connection with Crime No.0011 of 2019 registered with Osmanpura Police Station, District Aurangabad for the offences punishable under sections 315, 201, 417, 34 of IPC, u/s 23 of PCPNDT Act, u/s 27, 37, 33, 41 of Medical Practitioners Act and u/s 27(B) (2), 18 © of Drugs and Cosmetics Act and u/s 5 (2) (3) (4) of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act be released on bail on furnishing P.B. of Rs.15,000/-(Rs.Fifteen Thousand) each, with one surety of the like amount by each of them, on the following conditions :-

a] The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.
3. Application is accordingly disposed off.

( V.K. JADHAV, J. ) ...

aaa/-

::: Uploaded on - 30/04/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 03/05/2019 00:54:28 :::