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 11, Cited by 5]

Bombay High Court

Rabhaji Babu Barkade And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra on 25 June, 2020

Author: V. K. Jadhav

Bench: V. K. Jadhav

                                         1             945-BA-327-20.odt

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    945 BAIL APPLICATION NO.327 OF 2020

     1. Rabhaji Babu Barkade
     2. Babaji Rabhaji Barkade                      ... Applicants.
             Versus
     The State of Maharashtra                       ... Respondent.

                                      ...
                  Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Kunal A. Kale.
                  APP for Respondent-State : Mr. V. M. Kagne.
                                      ...

                                 CORAM :     V. K. JADHAV, J.
                                 DATE :      25.06.2020

     PER COURT :-

     1.      The applicants are seeking regular bail in connection

     with Crime No.I-889 of 2019 registered with Parner Police

     Station, District Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under

     Section 363, 366(A), 376(2)(n) of IPC and under Section 3, 4,

     5(L), 6, 16, 17, 42 of POCSO Act. Their application with

     similar prayer came to be rejected by the Additional Sessions

     Judge, Ahmednagar, vide order dated 05.03.2020 in Criminal

     Misc. Application No.182 of 2020.


     2.      The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the

     the allegations have been made mainly against the co-accused




::: Uploaded on - 26/06/2020                    ::: Downloaded on - 27/06/2020 02:15:45 :::
                                          2             945-BA-327-20.odt

     Sharad, who is still behind the bars.        The learned counsel

     submits that so far as the statement of the victim recorded on

     15.12.2019, she has not taken the names of the present

     applicants.       The learned counsel submits that so far as the

     allegations of commission of rape are concerned, those have

     been made mainly against co-accused Sharad. The learned

     counsel submits that despite the allegations about the

     commission of rape against co-accused Sharad, the victim had

     travelled along with co-accused Sharad at various places and

     stayed with him voluntarily. The learned counsel submits that

     only on 21.12.2019 the victim has disclosed the names of the

     present applicants. The antecedents of the applicants are clear.

     They are in jail since 01.02.2020. They may be released on

     bail.


     3.      The learned APP has strongly resisted the application on

     the ground that the victim has taken the names of the present

     applicants in her statement under Section 164 of the Criminal

     Procedure Code recorded by the Magistrate. The learned APP

     submits that the victim is minor below the age of 16 years and

     the applicants instigated the main co-accused Sharad to

     commit the offence of kidnapping and rape. The learned APP




::: Uploaded on - 26/06/2020                    ::: Downloaded on - 27/06/2020 02:15:45 :::
                                       3              945-BA-327-20.odt

     submits that Section 16 and 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012 are

     attracted. The learned APP submits that the applicants may not

     be released on bail.


     4.      On going through the allegations made in the complaint

     and on perusal of the charge-sheet, it appears that during the

     course of investigation on 15.12.2019 the statement of the

     victim came to be recorded by the police, wherein she has

     made the allegations only against co-accused Sharad. She has

     made the allegations against co-accused Sharad about the

     commission of rape so also about the promise of marriage

     made by him. It further appears that only on 21.12.2019 the

     victim has named the present applicant with specific role. So

     far as the applicant No.1 Rabhaji is concerned, no specific role

     has been ascribed to him.    However, certain allegations have

     been made against applicant No.2 Babaji. It further appears

     that in her police statement at the first instance the victim has

     not stated about kidnapping. Even she has not named the

     present applicant No.2 that he was forcibly taken her after

     inserting the cloth in her mouth. Applicant Nos.1 and 2 are

     the father and son and closed relatives of co-accused Sharad.

     Their antecedents are clear.     Thus, considering the entire




::: Uploaded on - 26/06/2020                  ::: Downloaded on - 27/06/2020 02:15:45 :::
                                                   4              945-BA-327-20.odt

     aspect of the case, I am inclined to released them on bail with

     certain conditions. Hence following order :

                                      ORDER

1. The application is hereby allowed.

2. The applicant No.1 Rabhaji Babu Barkade and applicant No.2 Babaji Rabhaji Barkade in connection with Crime No.I-889 of 2019 registered with Parner Police Station, District Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Section 363, 366(A), 376(2)(n) of IPC and under Section 3, 4, 5(L), 6, 16, 17, 42 of POCSO Act be released on bail on furnishing P.B. of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) each with one solvent surety of the like amount each on the following condition :-

a] The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.

3. The application is accordingly disposed off.

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

vmk/-

::: Uploaded on - 26/06/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 27/06/2020 02:15:45 :::