Bombay High Court
Natthu S/O Chirkut Kolhekar vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Pso Ps ... on 2 February, 2021
Bench: Z.A. Haq, Amit B. Borkar
1 19-J-APPEAL-452-20.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 452 OF 2020
Natthu s/o Chirkut Kolhekar,
Aged : 63 years, Occ : Labourer,
R/o At Ubali, Tq. Kalmeshwar,
Dist. Nagpur. ... APPELLANT
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through P.S.O. Kalmeshwar,
Distt. Nagpur.
2. Sugantibai Shivkumar Tekam, (Added as per Court's
Aged about : 39 years, order dtd.26.11.2020)
R/o C/o Manoj Golawar,
Ghorad Tah : Kalmeshwar,
Distt. Nagpur.
2A. Sumanlal Hajari Kajle, (Amended as per Court's
Aged about : 36 years, order dtd.14.12.2020)
R/o C/o Ashok Patle,
Ubali, Tah : Kalmeshwar,
Distt. Nagpur. ... RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ms. P. S. Chaudhari, Advocate for appellant.
Shri N.S.Rao, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-
State.
Ms. Sneha Dhote, Advocate (Appointed) for respondent No.2A.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM: Z.A. HAQ & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.
DATED : 02/02/2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER : Z.A. HAQ, J.)
1. Heard.
2. Admit.
2 19-J-APPEAL-452-20.odt
3. Crime No.769/2018 is registered against the appellant
and one more accused for the offences punishable under Sections
376(D), 452, 324 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections
3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
4. The First Information Report is registered on the report
lodged by the respondent No.2A - Sumanlal Hajari Kajle (brother
of victim). By the order dated 26/11/2020, this Court directed
issuance of notice to the respondents and directed to release the
appellant on provisional bail.
5. The respondent No.2A - Sumanlal (Informant) is
served and is represented by an Advocate. The notice of the
appeal could not be served on the respondent No.2 - Sugantibai
Shivkumar Tekam and the report of process server shows that she
is untraceable. An affidavit sworn by the S.D.P.O., Saoner
Division, Nagpur (Rural) is placed on record pointing out the steps
taken by the Investigating Agency to serve the notice of appeal on
the respondent No.2 - Sugantibai. From the above affidavit, it
appears that the Investigating Agency is finding it difficult to trace
the respondent No.2 - Sugantibai and the family members of the
3 19-J-APPEAL-452-20.odt
respondent No.2 - Sugantibai i.e. her husband, brother and father
have not co-operated with the Investigating Agency.
6. The appellant is aged about 63 years. In paragraph 1 of
the Memorandum of Appeal, it is stated that any other crime is not
registered against the appellant. The charge-sheet is filed. Apart
from the fact that the Investigating Agency has not been able to
show that further custody of the appellant is required. After
release of the appellant on provisional bail as per the order dated
26/11/2020, there is no complaint either by the Investigating
Agency or by the Informant that the appellant has misused the
liberty.
7. In view of the above, the following order is passed :-
i] The impugned order passed by the Special
Court is set aside.
ii] The order passed by this Court on 26/11/2020
directing that the appellant be released on bail is
confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
4 19-J-APPEAL-452-20.odt
8. The appeal is allowed accordingly.
9. The fees of the Advocate appointed to
represent the respondent No.2A be paid as per the Rules.
JUDGE JUDGE
Choulwar
