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

Machindra S/O. Devrao Thorat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 27 November, 2018

Author: V..L. Achliya

Bench: V..L. Achliya

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

          901 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1208 OF 2018


                                   Machindra Devrao Thorat
                                          VERSUS
                                   The State of Maharashtra
                                               ...
              Mr. Abhaysinh K. Bhosale, Advocate for the applicant
                      Mr. B.V. Virdhe, APP for respondent/State
                                              ...
                                              CORAM : V..L. ACHLIYA, J.
                                              DATE : 27th NOVEMBER, 2018

PER COURT :

1      The applicant apprehending arrest in connection with the offence
punishable u/s 354-A of I.P.C. and u/s 12 of Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences         Act, 2012 [for short, 'POCSO '] registered vide Crime
No.192 of 2018 with Police Station Ambhora, Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed, has
preferred this application for anticipatory bail.


2      Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the
State. Perused the FIR as well as papers of investigation made available by
learned APP.


3      Mr. Bhosale, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
incident is alleged to have taken place on 30.06.2017. F.I.R. in respect of
incident came to be lodged on 27.09.2018 i.e. after a period of more than




    ::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2018                        ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2018 09:44:08 :::
                                        2                           901_ABA_1208_2018



15 months that too by the person who has no personal knowledge about
the incident. It is further submitted that the victim girl who is alleged to
have complained against the applicant made allegation of making
sexually coloured remark against her inviting commission of offence u/s
354-A of IPC as well as act of sexual harassment defined u/s 11
punishable u/s 12 of POCSO Act has not come forward to make
statement before the police. It is submitted that applicant is 55 years of
age. He has rendered 35 years of service without stigma. The victim girl
had taken admission in the said institution about three days prior to the
alleged incident and left the Ashram Shala on 01.07.2018.                     It is
submitted that for the purpose of investigation the custodial interrogation
of the applicant is not required. The complaint is outcome of strained
relationship with the Watchman of Ashram Shala who was instrumental
in initiating proceeding against the applicant. It is submitted that in case
the applicant is arrested, there is every likelihood that he may be placed
under suspension. He, therefore, urged to extend protection to applicant.


4       On the other hand, learned APP opposed the application with
contention that the victim girl had made the complaint in presence of the
Principal and other teachers. It is submitted that complainant has given
written complaint, in which she has stated that the applicant used to
follow her as and when she used to go towards wash room and used to
enquire as to whether she has undergone the menstruation period. It is
further submitted that there are witnesses who have stated that the
victim girl has made such allegations against the applicant. He submits
that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, the investigation




    ::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2018                ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2018 09:44:08 :::
                                        3                           901_ABA_1208_2018



would be affected. It is submitted that statement of victim girl could not
be recorded as the parents of girl are not willing to co-operate.


5       In order to appreciate the submissions advanced, I have carefully
perused the FIR and papers of investigation. It appears that the FIR has
been registered on the basis of report of the In-charge Head Master of the
Ashram Shala. In the complaint filed, the complainant has stated that
the Committee appointed to enquire into allegations against the
applicant, has found the conduct and the character of the applicant as
objectionable. Written complaint alleged to be made by the victim girl in
her own handwriting, not bears the date on which such complaint was
made. According to prosecution, complaint was made on 30.06.2017.
However, as per case of prosecution, on 30.06.2017 the father of victim
girl made phone call and instructed to send her daughter along with
parents of two other girls who were visiting school on 30.06.2017 and to
take their daughter. On next day i.e. on 01.07.2017 the father of victim
girl visited Ashram Shala and taken his daughter with him. A perusal of
the complaint reveals that the alleged written complaint shown to be
recorded in presence of father of the victim girl, and his name
mentioned as one of the attesting witnesses. Shri. Kulkarni, the Principal
who was working in the said institution and before whom alleged
complaint was made, not reported incident to police.              None of the
student other than victim girl has stated that they were subjected to
similar type of act amounting to outraging the modesty and sexual
harassment at the hands of the applicant. Perusal of the statement of
Smt. S.P. Koli, Superintendent of the Ashram Shala reveals that the




    ::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2018                ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2018 09:44:08 :::
                                          4                           901_ABA_1208_2018



complainant was admitted in the Ashram Shala on 27.06.2017. She was
all the while telling that she does not want to stay in Ashram School.
Therefore, the possibility cannot be ruled out that as complainant was
not willing to stay in Ashram School, that may be the reason her to make
such complaint.


6.        Investigation of the case is practically over. The offence has been
registered after a period of more than 15 months after the incident.
Considering the overall facts of the case, custodial interrogation of the
applicant is not required. In case the applicant is arrested, there is every
likelihood that he may suffer serious consequences, as he is in service. I,
therefore, allow the application and pass the following order.


                                     ORDER
i)        Application is allowed.

ii)       Interim bail granted by order dated 02.11.2018 is made absolute.

The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required by the Investigating Officer and co-operate in investigation and he shall not indulge into the act amounting to tampering the prosecution witnesses.

iii) The application disposed of in above terms.

[V.L.ACHLIYA,J.] agd ::: Uploaded on - 29/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/12/2018 09:44:08 :::