Bombay High Court
Mrs. Cindrella Prabhu Khedekar On ... vs The State Of Maharashtra on 1 February, 2021
Bench: R.P. Mohite-Dere
Nisha S. Digitally signed by Nisha
S. Chitnis
Chitnis Date: 2021.02.03 12:02:38
+0530
1/5 3-ia.237.2021.doc
nsc.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.237 OF 2021
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.72 OF 2021
Cindrella Prabhu Khedekar
on behalf of Prabhu Santosh Khedekar ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
Mr. Dilip Shinde, for the Applicant.
Mr. A. R. Patil, A.P.P for the Respondent - State.
PSI - Priti Sawanji, Pant Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, is present.
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
DATE : 1st FEBRUARY, 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.
3. The applicant vide Judgment and Order dated 15th December
2020, passed by learned Special Judge under P.O.C.S.O. Act, 2012, Greater
2/5 3-ia.237.2021.doc
Mumbai, in POCSO Special Case No.231 of 2017, has been convicted and
sentenced as under:-
- for the offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal
Code to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay fine of
Rs.2,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 months;
- for the offence punishable under Section 8 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012, to suffer rigorous imprisonment
for 5 years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default, to undergo simple
imprisonment for 2 months;
Both the sentences were directed to be run concurrently.
- As far as the offence punishable under Sections 364-A, 170 and 385
of the Indian Penal Code are concerned, the applicant was acquitted of the
said offences.
4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the maximum
sentence imposed by the trial Court is 7 years for the offence punishable
under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code. He submits that the applicant
is in custody since the date of his arrest i.e. 26 th March 2017 i.e. 3 years and
10 months. He submits that the applicant was not on bail pending trial.
Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has undergone
more than 50 % of the maximum sentence imposed upon him. He submits
3/5 3-ia.237.2021.doc
that the applicant has no antecedents. Learned Counsel submits that as far
as allegations under Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, the same in the facts are not attracted. Learned Counsel for
the applicant further submits that the applicant will deposit the fine as well
as the compensation amount in the trial Court, within 8 weeks from today.
5. Learned APP does not dispute the fact that the applicant is in
custody since March 2017 and that the applicant has undergone more than
50% of the maximum sentence imposed upon him. He also does not
dispute the fact that the applicant has no antecedents.
6. Perused the papers. The allegations as against the applicant
essentially are that the applicant kidnapped the victim girl and demanded
ransom from the victim girl's father. As far as the offence under Section
364-A is concerned, the applicant has been acquitted of the said offence
and has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 363 of
the Indian Penal Code i.e. to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years.
According to the victim girl aged 13 years, the applicant moved his hand
on her back and as she did not like the touch, she pushed his hand,
pursuant to which, the applicant slapped her. For the said offence, the
applicant has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years.
4/5 3-ia.237.2021.doc
As noted above, both the sentences were directed to be run concurrently. It
is not in dispute that the applicant is in custody since the date of his arrest
i.e. since March 2017. The applicant has undergone more than 50 % of the
maximum sentence awarded to him. Admittedly, the applicant has no
antecedents. The Appeal has been admitted by a separate order passed
today and the same is not likely to come up for the hearing in the
immediate near future.
7. Considering the aforesaid, 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.25,000/- with one or two local sureties in the like amount;
ii) The applicant shall report to the trial Court, every month on
the day/date specified by the trial Court, till his Appeal is finally disposed
of;
iii) 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;
5/5 3-ia.237.2021.doc
iv) The applicant shall not enter the jurisdiction of Ghatkopar
Police Station, Mumbai, where the victim resides/where she studies, till the
conclusion of his appeal;
v) The applicant shall deposit the fine as well as the
compensation amount in the trial Court, within 8 weeks from the date of his
release;
vi) If there are two consecutive defaults in appearing before the
trial Court, or breach of clause (iv) hereinabove, 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.
8. The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
9. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
