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 5, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Prashant Siddharth More vs The State Of Maharashtra on 4 October, 2022

Author: Prakash D. Naik

Bench: Prakash D. Naik

         Digitally
         signed by
         VINA
VINA     ARVIND
ARVIND   KHADPE
         Date:                                                                 (7) aba 2720.2022.doc
KHADPE   2022.10.11   Vina Khadpe
         14:34:43
         +0530


                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                          CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                       CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2720 OF 2022

                      Prashant Siddharth More                             ...Applicant
                            Versus
                      The State Of Maharashtra                            ...Respondent

                                                              ....
                      Mr. Aniket Nikam i/b. Mr. Amit Icham, Advocate for the Applicant.
                      Mr. N. B. Shah, APP for the Respondent - State.
                      Mr. Gaurav Parkar, Advocate for the complainant.
                      PSI P.P. Jadhav and Ms.Shital Shivaji Bundgar, PC No.41025. ASP
                      Office, Mahad Division, present.


                                                  CORAM        :    PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
                                                  DATE         :    4th OCTOBER, 2022.
                      PER COURT:

                      1.        The applicant is apprehending arrest in CR No.110 of 2022

                      registered with MIDC Police Station, Mahad, Raigad on 12 th

                      September, 2022 for the offence punishable under Section 376,

                      354, 354-A, 354-D, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

                      2.        The case of the prosecution is that the victim is aged about

                      20 years. She got acquainted with the applicant. There was love

                      affair between them. They visited several places. The accused had

                      physically touched her on various occasions and subjected her to

                      sexual intercourse under the false promise of marriage. FIR was

                      lodged.


                                                          1
                                                          (7) aba 2720.2022.doc
Vina Khadpe




3.        The applicant has preferred an Application for Anticipatory

Bail before the Sessions Court. It was rejected vide order dated 20 th

September, 2022.

4.        Learned counsel for the applicant submitted the case of the

prosecution is false. The complainant has concocted the allegations.

Prima facie, there was friendly relationship between them. There is

no incident of sexual intercourse. There was no false promise of

marriage. The reliance has been placed on whatsApp's messages

exchanged between the victim and the applicant. The applicant is

employed in police department. He has been suspended. Custodial

interrogation of the accused is not necessary.

 5.       Learned APP submitted that there was evidence to indicate

that the applicant had visited the coffee shop along with the victim.

The statement of witness in that regard was recorded. The CCTV

footage was recovered. Medical evidence support the prosecution

case. The cell phone of the applicant is required to be seized.

6.        Learned counsel for the victim, submits that the alleged FIR

clearly mentions that the accused had made false promise of

marriage and subjected the victim to physical relationship. While

arguing the application before the lower Court, it was urged that

the relationship is of consensual nature. Now the applicant



                                    2
                                                               (7) aba 2720.2022.doc
Vina Khadpe




contends that there was no physical relationship between them.

The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary.                  The

complainant was threatened by two unknown persons and NC

complaint in that regard has been registered.


7.        On perusal of the FIR , it is apparent that the case of the

complainant is that she was in relationship with the applicant and

they were acquainted with each other from 9 th August, 2020 till the

registration of the FIR. The complaint refers to their acquaintance,

their visit to several places and physical relationship. The version in

FIR depicts consensual relationship. The applicant denies physical

relationship. Considering the contents of FIR, applicant need to be

subjected to custodial interrogation.


8.        Hence I pass following order :

                                 :: ORDER :

:

(i) In the event of arrest of applicant in CR No.110 of 2022 registered with MIDC Police Station, Mahad, Raigad, the applicant is directed to be released on Bail on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The applicant shall handover his cell phone to the investigating officer for the purpose of investigation.
3
(7) aba 2720.2022.doc Vina Khadpe
(iii) The applicant shall not approach the victim and shall not tamper with the evidence.
(iv) The applicant shall attend concerned police station on 10th , 11th and 12th October, 2022 between 11.00 am to 1.00 noon and thereafter as and when called for.
(v) Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed and disposed of.

(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) 4