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 7, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Sandip Narayan Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra on 17 January, 2020

Author: Prakash D. Naik

Bench: Prakash D. Naik

 Sajakali Jamadar                      1 of 4                     904-BA-3173-2019.doc




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3173 OF 2019

 Sandip Narayan Patil                                    ...Applicant

           Versus

 The State of Maharashtra                                ...Respondent
                                  .....
 Mr. Sanjeev Kadam i/b Prashant P. Raul, Advocate for the Applicant.
 Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the State-Respondent.
 Mr. Manesh Sable, PSI, Panvel Taluka Police Station, Navi Mumbai,
 Present.
                                  .....

                                CORAM :     PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
                                DATE :      17th January, 2020

 PC :

 1.        This is an application for bail in connection with C.R. No. 107

 of 2019 registered with New Panvel Taluka Police Station, Navi

 Mumbai for offences punishable under Sections 354, 354(B), 323,

 511 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 7, 8, 9(L)(N) and Section 12

 of POCSO Act.


 2.        The FIR was lodged on 18th June, 2019. The applicant is the

 father of the victim. The victim herself has lodged the FIR. In her

 statement she has stated that the applicant had touched her

 inappropriately on 8th May, 2019, 14th May, 2019 and 2nd June, 2019.

 Her statement mentions that the applicant had hugged, kissed and

 touched her on chest and tried to remove her cloths. The accused




::: Uploaded on - 20/01/2020                    ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2020 22:49:32 :::
  Sajakali Jamadar                    2 of 4                      904-BA-3173-2019.doc




 had also touched below her waist. The victim is girl aged about 15

 year. The victim is 10 th Standard student. For better performance in

 exams, the school had conducted counselling of students. At that

 time the victim had disclosed the aforesaid acts to the counsellor. The

 principal School and teacher called the parents and other relatives of

 the victim. They were informed about the sexual harassment meted

 out by the applicant. They decided to lodge the complaint, hence, the

 FIR was lodged. The statement of the mother of victim was recorded

 on 19th June, 2019. She had supported the version of the

 complainant. Statements of other witnesses including the grand

 father of the victim were recorded. Statement of school teacher and

 counsellor were recorded. They have corroborated version of the

 victim.


 3.        The applicant had preferred application for bail before the

 Special Court which has been rejected.


 4.        Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant

 is in custody from the date of his arrest. On account of detention of

 the applicant his family is suffering. The wife of the applicant as well

 as his father has filed the affidavit that the applicant is the sole bread

 earning member of the family. On account of his absentism show

 cause notice has been issued to him by employer. The family of the




::: Uploaded on - 20/01/2020                   ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2020 22:49:32 :::
  Sajakali Jamadar                    3 of 4                      904-BA-3173-2019.doc




 applicant has no other source of income. The father and the wife of

 the applicant has therefore decided to keep the applicant away from

 the victim girl, in the event he is granted bail. The affidavit in that

 regard are filed by the mother wife and the father of the applicant.


 5.        I have perused the charge sheet. The victim is the daughter of

 the applicant. There was no reason to falsely implicate the applicant.

 She had informed about the incident to her school teacher. All the

 other witnesses including her mother and grand father had

 supported the victim. In the supplementary statement, the victim had

 also stated that even in 2016 the applicant had tried to indulge in

 similar activity. The victim had referred to incidents dated on 8 th May,

 2018, 14th May, 2019 and 2nd June, 2019. The victim is presently

 studying in 10th Standard. The incident is of serious in nature. The

 applicant is the father of the victim who had subjected her to sexual

 harassment. Only on account of the affidavit tendered by the wife

 and his father of applicant bail cannot be granted. The order of the

 Sessions Court indicates that the case was kept for framing charge

 and the trial Court was likely to proceed with trial expeditiously.

 Considering the aforesaid circumstances, No case for grant of bail is

 made out.




::: Uploaded on - 20/01/2020                   ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2020 22:49:32 :::
  Sajakali Jamadar                         4 of 4                     904-BA-3173-2019.doc




                                           ORDER

i) Bail Application No.3173 of 2019 stands rejected and disposed of accordingly.

                    ii)    Trial is expedited.



                                                   (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)




::: Uploaded on - 20/01/2020                       ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2020 22:49:32 :::