Bombay High Court
Dilawar Hafiz Khan vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 1 April, 2021
Bench: R.P. Mohite-Dere
12-APPA-823-2019.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.823 OF 2019
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.599 OF 2019
Dilawar Hafiz Khan ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Nitin Sejpal for the Applicant
Mr. S. V. Gavand, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1- State
Ms. Devyani Hemant Kulkarni, Appointed Advocate for the Respondent
No.2
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
THURSDAY, 1st APRIL 2021
P.C. :
1 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2 By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of his
sentence and enlargement on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal
of the appeal.
SQ Pathan 1/6
::: Uploaded on - 05/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2021 15:19:25 :::
12-APPA-823-2019.doc
3 The applicant along with other accused, vide judgment and
order dated 27th February 2019, passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No.609 of 2014, has been convicted and
sentenced as under:
- for the offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian
Penal Code to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay
fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo
simple imprisonment for 6 months;
- for the offence punishable under Section 376(2)(l) of the
Indian Penal Code to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and
to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to
undergo simple imprisonment for one year;
- for the offence punishable under Section 376D of the Indian
Penal Code to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and to pay
fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo
simple imprisonment for 1 year;
All the aforesaid sentences were directed to run concurrently.
SQ Pathan 2/6
::: Uploaded on - 05/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2021 15:19:25 :::
12-APPA-823-2019.doc
4 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the evidence
adduced by the prosecution is not sufficient to convict the applicant. He
submits that a perusal of the evidence of the prosecutrix would show that
she has disclosed about misdeeds by accused and has not spelt out the
misdeeds. He submits that even the identification parade is flawed,
inasmuch as, the prosecutrix, in her cross-examination has admitted that the
accused were shown to her in the police station before identification and
that the police had told her to identify the accused. He submits that there is
no corroborative evidence to the said evidence of the prosecutrix. He
submits that there is no DNA report showing applicant's complicity, as is
available as against co-accused Nos. 1 and 3. He further submits that the
applicant is in custody for more than 7 years and that on merits, the
applicant is sanguine of succeeding in the appeal. He submits that the
applicant has no antecedents.
5 Neither the learned A.P.P nor the learned counsel for the
respondent No. 2 are able to show any corroboration to the evidence of the
prosecutrix, more particularly, since the prosecutrix was intellectually
challenged and having regard to the nature of evidence that has come on
record.
SQ Pathan 3/6
::: Uploaded on - 05/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2021 15:19:25 :::
12-APPA-823-2019.doc
6 Perused the papers. It appears that the prosecutrix, after a
quarrel with her mother and brother, and assault by her brother, left her
house and went to Pune Railway Station. She has stated that one boy
(accused No. 1) and she boarded the train, went to a lodge, where the said
accused committed misdeeds with her; that on the next date, he
accompanied her to one field; that the said accused i.e. accused No. 1 made
a phone call and called other boys i.e. accused Nos. 2 to 4 and that all the
said accused also committed misdeeds with her. All the accused are alleged
to have assaulted her and left her alone at the field. She has further stated
that after the incident, she returned home, after which, she was taken to the
police chowky, where her complaint was lodged.
7 As far as applicant is concerned, there is no corroborative
evidence to the prosecutrix's evidence, as is available against accused Nos.
1 and 3 i.e. the DNA report. The applicant has no antecedents and is in
custody for more than 7 years.
8 Considering the aforesaid, learned counsel for the applicant has
made out a case for suspension of applicant's sentence and enlargement on
bail.
SQ Pathan 4/6
::: Uploaded on - 05/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 04/09/2021 15:19:25 :::
12-APPA-823-2019.doc
9 Accordingly, the application is allowed and the applicant's
sentence is suspended and he is enlarged on bail, pending the hearing and
final disposal of his appeal, on the following terms and conditions :
ORDER
i) The applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in
the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two local solvent sureties in the
like amount;
ii) The applicant shall not contact or attempt to influence the
prosecutrix or tamper with the evidence, witnesses or any person
concerned with the case;
iii) The applicant shall report to the trial Court, once in two
months on the day/date specified by the trial Court, till his appeal is
finally disposed of;
iv) The applicant shall keep the trial Court informed of his
current address and mobile contact number and/or change of
residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time;
SQ Pathan 5/6
12-APPA-823-2019.doc
v) If there are two consecutive defaults in appearing before the
trial Court, the learned Judge shall make a report to the High Court and
the prosecution would be at liberty to file an application seeking
cancellation of bail.
9 The Application is accordingly disposed of.
10 All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
SQ Pathan 6/6
