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 6, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Swati Baliram Dhumal vs The State Of Maharashtra on 16 March, 2021

Author: Revati Mohite Dere

Bench: Revati Mohite Dere

           Digitally
           signed by
Shagufta   Shagufta Q.
           Pathan                                                            18-BA-1877-2019.doc
Q.         Date:
Pathan     2021.03.17
           14:36:23
           +0530
                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                            CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1877 OF 2019

                 Swati Baliram Dhumal                                  ...Applicant
                     Versus
                 The State of Maharashtra                              ...Respondent


                 Mr. Omkar Virendra Warange for the Applicant

                 Mr. P. H. Gaikwad-Patil, A.P.P for the Respondent-State
                 PC (2233) Mr. Moreshwar Tukaram Omle from Mahad City Police Station,
                 is present

                                            CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
                                            TUESDAY, 16th MARCH 2021


                 P.C. :


                 1            Heard learned counsel for the parties.


                 2            By this application, the applicant seeks his enlargement on bail

                 in connection with C.R. No. 131 of 2018 registered with the Mahad City

                 Police Station, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 370,

                 376(2)(J)(N), 354 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under

                 Sections 4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act

                 and under Section 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.


     SQ Pathan                                                                               1/5
                                                                      18-BA-1877-2019.doc




            3           Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has

            been falsely implicated in the said case. He submits that the applicant is in

            custody since 15th October 2018 and till date, not a single witness has been

            examined. He submits that all the co-accused in the said case have been

            enlarged on bail. Learned counsel relied on the order dated 22 nd April 2019

            passed by this Court (Coram : P. N. Deshmukh, J.) in Bail Application No.

            542 of 2019 preferred by the co-accused - Ranjit Ramesh Natekar.

            Learned counsel relied on the observations made in the said order. He

            further submits that a perusal of the 161 statement of the prosecutrix

            allegedly 17 years old, is in variance with her statement recorded under

            Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. He further submits that the

            applicant has no antecedents.



            4           Learned A.P.P opposes the application.



            5           Perused the papers. From a perusal of the statement of the

            prosecutrix, it appears that she was sexually exploited by a number of

            people. It is alleged that the applicant introduced her to the said trade. A

            perusal of the 161 statement shows that the prosecutrix's financial

            condition was poor and therefore, she did not object to the sexual

SQ Pathan                                                                             2/5
                                                                       18-BA-1877-2019.doc


            exploitation, as she received money from the same. It is not in dispute that

            all the co-accused in the said case including the co-accused - Ranjit

            Natekar have been enlarged on bail. The birth certificate of the prosecutrix

            shows that she was couple of months short of 18 years of age. The same

            appears from the medical certificate issued by the Rural Hospital, Mahad.

            The co-accused - Ranjit Natekar has been enlarged on bail, having regard

            to the fact that the possibility of the prosecutrix being a major, could not be

            ruled out. The applicant has no antecedents. She is in custody since 15 th

            October 2018. Till date, not a single witness has been examined.



            6           Considering the aforesaid, the application is allowed on the

            following terms and conditions :

                                                   ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail, on executing PR Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one or two local sureties in the like amount;

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on the first Sunday of every month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon, until further orders;

SQ Pathan 3/5

18-BA-1877-2019.doc

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the prosecutrix, witnesses or any person concerned with the case;

(iv) The applicant shall inform her latest place of residence and mobile contact number immediately after being released and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Court seized of the matter and to the Investigating Officer of the concerned Police Station;

(v) The applicant shall deposit her passport, if any, to the Investigating Officer before her release;

(vi) The applicant to cooperate with the conduct of the trial and attend the trial Court on all dates, unless exempted;

(vii) The applicant shall file an undertaking with regard to clauses (ii) to (vi) in the trial Court, within two weeks of her release;

(viii) If there are two consecutive defaults either in attending the Police Station or if the applicant fails to appear before the trial Court, or there is breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the SQ Pathan 4/5 18-BA-1877-2019.doc prosecution shall be at liberty to seek cancellation of the applicant's bail.

7 The application is accordingly disposed of. 8 It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie, and the trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. 9 All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

SQ Pathan 5/5