Bombay High Court
Altaf Mohd Babu Ansari vs State Of Maharashtra on 6 May, 2024
Author: N. J. Jamadar
Bench: N. J. Jamadar
2024:BHC-AS:21951
37.BA.2637.2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2637 OF 2023
Altaf Mohd. Babu Ansari. ...Applicant
vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Akhlak Khan, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for Respondent No. 1 State.
Mr. Sanjay Dubey i/b. Mr. Manoj Mishra, Advocate for
Respondent No. 2.
PI Sunil Bile, Malavani Police Station, Mumbai.
ARUNA
SANDEEP
TALWALKAR
CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J.
Digitally signed by
ARUNA SANDEEP
TALWALKAR
DATE : MAY 6, 2024
Date: 2024.05.10
20:43:04 +0530
P.C.:
1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, Learned
Counsel for the Respondent No. 2 and the learned APP for the
State.
2. This is an application for bail in Special Case No. 498 of
2022, arising out of C.R. No. 1023 of 2022 registered with
Malvani Police Station for the offences punishable under
sections 363, 366(A), 368, 376, 506, 377 of the Indian Penal
Code and Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children
from Sexual Offices Act, 2012.
Talwalkar 1
::: Uploaded on - 10/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2024 15:31:44 :::
37.BA.2637.2023.doc
3. The victim, then 16 years of age, is the sister in law of the
applicant. On 31st July, 2022, the victim had a quarrel with her
brother. The victim was apprehensive that her brother would
cause harm to her. Therefore, she went to the house of her
sister, wife of the applicant. When the applicant was alone in the
said house, the applicant sexually exploited the victim. The
applicant threatened the victim not to disclose the incident to
anybody, lest she would face dire consequences. On the next
day, the applicant again took the victim to Hajiali Dargah,
Mumbai. They spent about two days there. As the applicant left
the victim near Kandivali, Mumbai on 4 th August, 2022 the
victim called her mother.
4. In the meanwhile, the mother of the victim had lodged a
report with Malvani Police Station that somebody had enticed
the victim away and the Crime was registered vide C.R. No.
1023 of 2022, for an offence punishable under section 363 of
the Indian Penal Code. Upon the statement of the victim,
offences punishable under section 366(A), 368, 376, 506, 377 of
the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offices Act, 2012 came to be
added.
5. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the
Talwalkar 2
::: Uploaded on - 10/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2024 15:31:44 :::
37.BA.2637.2023.doc
applicant had been falsely roped in on account of family dispute.
Before the Sessions Court, the mother of the victim had filed an
affidavit and gave consent for granting bail to the applicant.
6. Learned APP resisted the prayer for bail. It was submitted
that at the time of the alleged occurrence, the victim had barely
completed 16 years of age. At this stage, there is no reason to
disbelieve the version of the victim. Learned APP fairly
submitted that in the statement of the victim recorded before
the learned Magistrate under section 164 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the victim has not supported the
prosecution.
7. I have perused the statement of the victim recorded under
section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The victim
has stated that she had a quarrel with her brother and for fear
of her safety, she had come to the house of the applicant and
therefrom they had gone to Haji Ali Dargah and stayed there.
The situation is that in her statement under section 164 of the
Code, the victim has declined to support the prosecution
version. I have perused the medico-legal examination
certificate. The victim had narrated the history of sexual
exploitation at the hands of the applicant. However, the victim
stated that when they visited Haji Ali Dargah and stayed there.
Talwalkar 3
::: Uploaded on - 10/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2024 15:31:44 :::
37.BA.2637.2023.doc
There was no sexual assault.
8. In these circumstances, prima facie there is variance in the
version of the victim. It could be urged that the victim might
have been won over, during the intervening period. However,
since the victim has not supported the prosecution version in
her statement under section 164 of the Code and the applicant
is in custody since 6th August, 2022, at this stage, further
detention of the applicant appears unwarranted and, therefore,
I am inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant.
Hence, the following order.
ORDER
1] The application stands allowed.
2] The applicant Altaf Mohd. Babu Ansari be released on bail in C.R. No. 1023 of 2022 registered with Malvani Police Station in Spl. Case No. 498 of 2022, on furnishing a P.R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.
3] The applicant shall mark his presence at Malvani Police Station on the first Monday of every alternate month between 11 am to 1 pm till conclusion of the trial. 4] The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and give threat or inducement to first informant, Talwalkar 4 ::: Uploaded on - 10/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2024 15:31:44 :::
37.BA.2637.2023.doc any of the prosecution witnesses or any person acquainted with the facts of the case.
5] The applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the investigating officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change. 6] The applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court.
7] By way of abundant caution, it is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are confined for the purpose of determination of the entitlement for bail and they may not be construed as an expression of opinion on the guilt or otherwise of the applicant and the trial Court shall not be influenced by any of the observations made hereinabove.
8] Application is disposed of.
(N. J. JAMADAR, J.)
Talwalkar 5
::: Uploaded on - 10/05/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 24/05/2024 15:31:44 :::