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 2, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Nitin Mahadev Dixit vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 March, 2022

Author: C.V. Bhadang

Bench: C.V. Bhadang

                                                                         32-ba-330-2021.doc




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                      CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.330 OF 2021

                   Nitin Mahadev Dixit                                     ...Applicant
                               Vs.
                   The State of Maharashtra                                ... Respondent
                                                     ----
                        Mr.Sachin H. Deokar for the Applicant.
                        Mr.A.R. Kapadnis, APP for the Respondent-State.
        Digitally signedMr.Shashikant D. Khopade, PN/2475, Vadgaon Maval Police
NILAM   by NILAM
        SANTOSH
SANTOSH KAMBLE          Station.
KAMBLE Date:  2022.03.03
        09:53:57 +0530
                                                     ----
                                                    CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J.

                                                         DATE      : 2 MARCH 2022
                   P.C.

                   .                    By this Application, the Applicant is seeking bail
                   arising our of Crime No.236 of 2018 of Vadgaon Maval Police
                   Station, Pune under Section 452 and 376 of the Indian Penal
                   Code.


                   2.                   The aforesaid crime is registered on the basis of the
                   complaint lodged by the prosecutrix who at the relevant time was
                   42 years of age and a married lady.


                   3.                   The Applicant is having ancestral property at
                   Punaval, District-Pune.             On account of the dispute on the
                   ancestral property with her brother she had shifted at Pune where

                        N.S. Kamble                                                       page 1 of 4
                                                   32-ba-330-2021.doc



she got acquainted with the Applicant.             According to the
informant, the Applicant represented that he can help her out in
the matter of the dispute with her brother and taking undue
advantage of the said acquaintance had committed forcible sexual
intercourse with her on 5 August 2020 at about 7 p.m. at a
rented premises of the Applicant belonging to one Rathod.


4.                 I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
Perused record.


5.                 A perusal of the FIR shows that the procecutrix
immediately after incident came out of the room where she met
the mother of the Applicant and narrated the incident to her. She
claims that the mother of the Applicant persuaded her not to
report the matter to the Police Station. However, she went to
Police Station, Vadgaon Maval at about 8.15 p.m. However, on
account of the fact that there was no lady Police Officer present in
the Police Station, she narrated incident to the Station House
Office only attributing an assault to the Applicant. In other
words in the report lodged on 5 August 2018 immediately after
the incident, she did not narrate the incident of the sexual assault.
It is only on 6 December 2018 that she lodged another complaint
stating that the Applicant had sexually abused her on 5 August
2018.




     N.S. Kamble                                                   page 2 of 4
                                                        32-ba-330-2021.doc



6.                 In this case after investigation a charge-sheet is filed.
It can prima facie be seen that in the report immediately lodged
after the incident the prosecutrix has not attributed any sexual
assault to the Applicant. It is not necessary to go into the reason
at this stage. She states that as in the interregnum the Applicant
started harassing her, she reported the actual incident on 6
December 2018. The Applicant has been arrested on 7 December
2018 and has completed more than 3 years in jail.


7.                 The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted
that there are criminal antecedents to the discredit of the
Applicant in Crime No.56 of 2014 and 244 of 2014 at Wadgaon
Maval Police Station. It is submitted that the Applicant may
misuse his liberty.


8.                 In my considered view, having regard to the overall
circumstances, the apprehension expressed on behalf of the
prosecution can be taken care of by imposing conditions.


9.                 In the result the following order is passed.


                                    ORDER

(i) The applicant Nitin Mahadev Dixit be released on bail, on executing a P.R. Bond in the sum of N.S. Kamble page 3 of 4 32-ba-330-2021.doc Rs.25,000/-with one or two solvent sureties, in the like amount.

(ii) The applicant shall undertake to remain present before the learned Sessions Judge during the trial, unless exempted.

(iii) The applicant shall not enter jurisdiction of the PS Vadgaon Maval and shall not make any attempt to directly or indirectly to contact the victim and shall not otherwise tamper with the prosecution evidence/ witnesses.

(iv) In the event of breach of any of the conditions, the bail is liable to be cancelled.

(v) The bail bonds to be furnished before the learned Sessions Judge.

(vi) The Criminal Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms C.V. BHADANG, J.

N.S. Kamble                                                          page 4 of 4