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 3, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Zubair Iqbal Dhanani vs The State Of Maharashtra on 2 February, 2021

Author: Prakash D. Naik

Bench: Prakash D. Naik

                       rpa                         1/8                 3 aba 134 2021.doc


                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                             ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.134 OF 2021
                                                WITH
                                 INTERIM APPLICATION NO.207 OF 2021

                       Zubair Iqbal Dhanani                         .. Applicant
                             Versus
                       State of Maharashtra                         .. Respondent

                                                      ......
                       Mr.Ashok Mundergi, Senior Advocate with Ms.Shraddha Sawant,
                       Advocate for the Applicant in ABA.

                       Mr.S.V. Marwadi i/b. Mr.N.M. Nadar, Advocate for the Applicant
                       in IA.

                       Mr.Y.M. Nakhwa, APP for the Respondent - State.

                       PSI Sudhir Mahadev Ubale, Palghar Police Station, Present.
                                                    ......

                                                   CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

                                                   DATED : FEBRUARY 02, 2021.

                       P.C. :

                                   The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection

                       with C.R.No.313 of 2020, registered with Palghar Police Station,

                       on 24th December, 2020, for the ofences punishable under

         Digitally     Sections 376, 363, 323, 504 and 506 read with 34 of Indian Penal
         signed by
RajeP.   RajeP. Aher
         Date:
                       Code ("IPC", for short).
Aher     2021.02.10
         17:42:04
         +0530
                       2           The complainant has alleged that she was acquainted

                       with the applicant. They were exchanging messages on mobile
 rpa                           2/8                  3 aba 134 2021.doc


phone. They used to meet. The applicant had informed her that

he would marry her. He was already a married person. There was

physical   relationship   between   them.   The   complainant       was

pregnant. The pregnancy was terminated at the instance of the

applicant on 26th September, 2020. The applicant stopped calling

the complainant. She informed about the conduct of the applicant

to his father. She was abused and threatened. On 19 th December,

2020, the complainant called the applicant on his phone. The call

was received by his brother who threatened her of dire

consequences and threatened her that false complaint would be

lodged against her. The complainant stopped talking to applicant.

On 22nd December, 2020 at about 2:34 p.m. the applicant called

her on her cell phone and told her to meet him at his showroom

as he want to talk to her. He threatened her that if she do not

come, he would create ruckus at her residence. At about 4:30

p.m., the complainant went towards Boiser on her scooter and

reached at the show room of the applicant at 5:30 p.m. The

applicant forced her to sit in his car and took her to Nandgaon

area at isolated place around 07:00 p.m. The car was parked near

the bushes. The applicant told the complainant that he intends to

have physical relationship with her. The complainant refused. She

tried to shout. She could not come out of the car. The accused
 rpa                                 3/8                  3 aba 134 2021.doc


had bitten her lip and had forceful sexual intercourse with her.

She was dropped near the show room at about 09:00 p.m. She

walked to the place where she had parked her Scooty and went

home. The First Information Report ("FIR", for short) was lodged

on 24th December, 2020.


3           Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the

relationship is apparently of consensual nature. The incident of

forceful physical relationship dated 22nd December, 2020, is false.

It is submitted that the applicant had relied upon the footage of

CCTV cameras installed in the showroom of the applicant. The

complainant had visited the showroom and was sitting in the

ofice of the applicant at 03:30 p.m., which is apparent from the

CCTV Footage of the showroom. The CCTV Footage further shows

that the complainant went by herself on her Scooty and the

allegation that she was forced to sit in the vehicle by the

applicant   is   false.   It   is   submitted   that   subsequently,          the

complainant has tried to change her version in the supplementary

statement and alleged that although she left the showroom on her

own, the applicant came behind her and told her that he wants to

talk to her. She followed him on her Scooty. The applicant was

waiting for her. She got down from the Scooty and at that time

the applicant pulled her in the car and took her to Alewadi beach.
 rpa                          4/8                   3 aba 134 2021.doc


Thereafter, he told her that he would drop her at Boiser and while

returning he took the vehicle at isolated place and had forceful

sexual intercourse with her. It was also alleged that the tissue

paper used by her after sexual assault was thrown at the place of

incident. It is submitted that this is complete improvisation to the

previous statement. The complainant realised that the CCTV

Footage is contrary to her version and hence improved her

version in the subsequent statement. The allegation that tissue

paper was thrown at place of incident is added in supplementary

statement. It is further submitted that the FIR was lodged two

days after the incident. Accused and the complainant were in

relationship. There was WhatsApp conversation between them.

She was aware that the applicant is a married person. There are

call recordings of conversation between the complainant and the

applicant. The transcript of conversation would indicate that no

such incident of sexual assault dated 22 nd December, 2020 had

occurred.


4           Learned APP submitted that the complainant has

attributed specifc overtact to the applicant alleging forceful

physical relationship on 22nd December, 2020. Supplementary

statement of the complainant was recorded on 31 st December,

2020, which mentions that the complainant had left showroom on
 rpa                               5/8                     3 aba 134 2021.doc


her own and subsequently, the applicant had forced her to sit in

his car and after taking her to isolated place, she was subjected

to sexual assault. It is further submitted that there are several

complaints against the family of the applicant. The complainant

has submitted complaint stating that the applicant tried to make

WhatsApp call to her and creating pressure upon her for

withdrawing the complaint. It is further submitted that the

applicant has been convicted for an ofence under Section 326 of

IPC and Appeal against conviction is pending. During the course

of    investigation,   it   was   revealed   that   the     applicant      and

complainant had visited several places. There was physical

relationship between them. The applicant had fled one complaint

with Palghar police station against some person which has

resulted in grant of "B" Summary, which shows that he is fling

false complaint.


5             Learned counsel for the intervenor submitted that the

incident dated 22nd December, 2020 amounts to commission of

ofence under Section 376 of IPC. The act was committed under

coercion and without consent of the complainant. There is

suficient evidence about his involvement in the ofence. The

complainant was forced to board the vehicle and she was taken to

isolated place where she was subjected to forceful sexual assault.
 rpa                          6/8                   3 aba 134 2021.doc


It is submitted that the transcript produced by the applicant is

not complete. Applicant is putting pressure on the complainant to

withdraw the complaint.



6           On perusal of FIR dated 24th December, 2020, it is

apparent that the applicant and the complainant were acquainted

with each other. There was physical relationship between them.

The investigation also reveals that both of them visited several

places. The relationship appears to be consensual. It is alleged

that on 22nd December, 2020, the applicant had forceful physical

relationship with her after taking her in his car to isolated place.

The applicant had preferred an application for anticipatory bail

before the Sessions Court. Applicant had contended that no such

incident dated 22nd December, 2020, had occurred. In support of

his submissions, he relied upon the CCTV Footage which shows

that the applicant left the show room on his own and travelled

outside in his vehicle and thereafter, the victim left the showroom

on her Scooty, which was parked outside his showroom. The time

shown in the video clip show that the victim was in the showroom

between 03:00 to 04:00 p.m. This is contrary to the version of the

complainant. The application was rejected by the Sessions Court

vide order dated 8th January, 2021. The prosecution pointed out
 rpa                              7/8                      3 aba 134 2021.doc


the supplementary statement of the complainant which mentions

that both of them left separately and the complainant proceeded

on her Scooty. The applicant came in his vehicle and told her that

he wants to talk to her. Thereafter, she was made to board in the

vehicle of the applicant and she was taken to Alewadi beach and

while returning, she was taken to isolated place where the

incident had occurred. Thus, there is improvisation in the

supplementary statement, which was recorded on 31 st December,

2020. The applicant has also relied upon the details of WhatsApp

conversation between the applicant and the complainant and the

transcript of calls between them.


6            Taking into consideration the factual matrix as stated

above and the documents, on record interim protection can be

granted to the applicant with direction to co-operate with the

investigation.


7            Hence, I pass the following order:


                           ::   O R D E R :

:

(i) In the event of arrest of the applicant in connection with C.R.No.I-313 of 2020, dated 24th December, 2020, registered with Palghar Police rpa 8/8 3 aba 134 2021.doc Station, the applicant be released on bail on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/-, with one or more sureties in the like amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report the investigating oficer on 9th 10th, 11th and 12th February, 2021, between 11:00 a.m. to 01:00 p.m., and thereafter as and when called for, till the next date of hearing;
(iii) The applicant shall not intimidate complainant and shall not enter the vicinity of the residence of the complainant;
(iv) Stand over to 22nd February, 2021.

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)