High Court

Legal Reasoning

ba432.24-bail-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 432 OF 2024Prabhakar Laxman PawarversusThe State of Maharashtra and another …..Advocate for the applicant: Mr. Aniket V. DeshmukhA.P.P. for the respondent No.1 State: Mrs. Pratibha J. Bharad Advocate for respondent No.2:Mr. A.A.Jagatkar ….. CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. DATED : 19th MARCH, 2024. PER COURT :- 1.This is an application for granting bail under section 439 ofthe Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) inconnection with crime No. 304 of 2023 registered with Mehunbarepolice station, District Jalgaon for the offences punishable underSections 376, 354-A, 354-D, 509, 506 of I.P.C. His application withsimilar prayer below Exh. 3 in Sessions Case No. 29 of 2024 cameto be rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaonvide order dated 22.2.2024.2.The informant is 19 years old girl, she averred in the report,dated 20.11.2023, that she was residing with her parents. Herparents are labourers. She was doing the labour work with them.Entire family was working in the agricultural land of the applicant. Inthe year 2022 when she was working in the agricultural land of theapplicant, he caught hold her hands and told her that he want to talk ba432.24-bail-2- with her alone. But she had refused for the same. The applicantwas making phone calls to her and forcing her to meet him. Oncethe wife of the applicant directed the prosecutrix to go to bring waterbottle. She went to the farm house of the applicant, at that time hecaught hold her and committed rape on her against her wish. At thattime, she was 17 years old. He threatened to kill her and herparents. Therefore, she could not disclose that fact to anybody. Theapplicant used to make phone calls to her on her mobile. He used tocall her frequently to the agricultural land and house and used tocommit sexual intercourse with her frequently. She did not disclose itto anybody. She was under the impression that the same will bestopped after her marriage. 3.In December 2022, when the prosecutrix was going to college,the applicant forcibly took her to lodge a report and committed sexualintercourse with her. He snapped her photographs and recorded thevideo of that episode. When she refused, he threatened to kill her.Her engagement was performed in February, 2023. Thereafter,again the applicant in his Indica Car came to S.T. Bus stand at Ravi,when the prosecutrix was coming from college, he threatened that hewill make viral that video shooting. He again took her to the lodgeand committed sexual intercourse with her. 4.After the marriage of prosecutrix was performed on 16.5.2023,again the applicant sent message on Instagram that he wanted to ba432.24-bail-3- visit her. She requested him that now she is married and do notbreak up that marriage. Thus, the applicant threatened that he willsend that video to her husband. Therefore, in between July 2023 to15.8.2023, he took her to the lodge behind Ravi college andcommitted sexual intercourse with her. The applicant used to makephone calls to her frequently and that fact was noticed by herhusband and therefore, her husband expelled her from his house. InSeptember, 2023, her divorce took place and thereafter, theapplicant did not contact her. 5.When the second marriage of the prosecutrix was settled, theapplicant made phone calls to the mediator Abasaheb JagannathPawar and told him that he had illicit relations with the prosecutrix.He also told him that he is having obscene photos and video of theprosecutrix. He thus, broke the second marriage also. The applicantunder the influence of liquor used to come to the house of theprosecutrix and used to threat her. Therefore, the informant lodgedthe report. 6.Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the applicantis falsely implicated in the crime when the parents of the prosecutrixassaulted the applicant and his family members, a report was lodgedagainst them under Section 324 of I.P.C.. Now matter has beensettled and the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- is paid to theprosecutrix. Today, the prosecutrix has filed affidavit that the matter ba432.24-bail-4- has been settled and further stated that an amount of Rs.5,00,000/-is received by her towards marriage and for future expenses. Thesaid affidavit is taken on record and marked as “Y-1” foridentification. Learned advocate for the applicant therefore,submitted that it is a case of consensual sexual relations. He prayedfor granting bail. 7.Learned advocate representing for the prosecutrix submittedthat the matter is settled between the applicant and the prosecutrix,not only about this case but the case which is registered against thefamily members of the prosecutrix for assaulting the applicant. Hesubmitted to grant bail to the applicant. 8.Learned A.P.P. for the respondent-State has strongly opposedthe application and submitted that at the time of incident, theprosecutrix was child as defined in POCSO Act. The school leavingcertificate of the prosecutrix shows her date of birth as 21.06.2004.There is ample evidence against the applicant. Learned A.P.P. lastlysubmitted that considering serious nature of the crime, theapplication be rejected. 9. Perused the charge sheet, particularly, the report and thestatements of witnesses. The applicant has roots in the society, hewill not flee away from the trial, the trial will take a long period,therefore, without adverting to the merits of the case, considering the ba432.24-bail-5- facts and circumstances of the case and the prosecutrix has filed anaffidavit, as above, the application deserves to be allowed on somestringent conditions. Hence, the following order. O R D E RI.Application is allowed.II.The applicant in connection with crime No. 304 of 2023registered with Mehunbare police station, District Jalgaon forthe offences punishable under Sections 376, 354-A, 354-D,509, 506 of I.P.C. be released on bail on furnishing personalbond of Rs.50,000/- with one surety of the like amount onfollowing conditions:- a)The applicant shall not pressurize or contact in any waythe prosecutrix or any of the witnesses and her familymembers. b)The applicant shall not misuse the photographs of theprosecutrix or video shooting, in future. c)If some misuse of the photographs of the prosecutrix orvideo shooting is noticed or any witness is pressurized,the trial court is at liberty to proceed to cancel the bailgranted to this applicant in future without reference tothis Court. d)Respondent No.2 to submit receipt of fixed deposit ofRs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lacs) in her name andRs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lac) in her father’s name,within two weeks from today. ba432.24-bail-6- 10.It is made clear that this order shall not be treated asprecedent as it is passed in peculiar set of facts. (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) rlj/