Kiran Baban Pawar vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 4645 Bom

           Digitally
                                                                       19-IA-772-2021.odt
           signed by
           Shambhavi
Shambhavi N. Shivgan
N. Shivgan Date:
           2021.03.12    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
           18:47:41
           +0530              CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                  INTERIM APPLICATION NO.772 OF 2021
                                                  IN
                                    CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.189 OF 2020

                        Kiran Baban Pawar                        ... Applicant
                             Vs
                        The State of Maharashtra & Anr.         ... Respondents
                                                  ...

Mr. Kedar J. Patil for the Applicant.

Mr. S.R.Agarkar, APP for the Respondent-State.

CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.

DATE : 12th MARCH, 2021.

P.C. :

It is an application for suspension of sentence,

pending appeal.

2 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the

learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                        Shivgan                                                      1/4
                                               19-IA-772-2021.odt

3         The applicant has been convicted of the ofence

punishable under Section 4 of the Protection of Children

From Sexual Ofence Act, 2012 ('POCSO' for short) and

sentenced to sufer rigorous imprisonment for ten years

and to pay fne of Rs.10,000/- with default stipulation.

4 Pending trial, applicant was enlarged on bail. He

had not misused the liberty.

5 I have perused the evidence of the victim. She

did not support the prosecution. She did not acknowledge

fling of the FIR against the applicant. Her statement under

Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was

recorded. However, she stated, it was at the instance of the

police.

6 The learned Trial Court, as it appears from the

judgment, relied on Section 29 of the POCSO Act to convict

the appellant/original accused no.2.

Shivgan                                                     2/4
                                               19-IA-772-2021.odt




7         Statutory presumption would stand activated only

if prosecution proves foundational facts. Prima-facie, the

evidence of prosecution does not suggest or show that such

facts were proved.

8 In consideration of the evidence on record, prima-

facie, in my view, there are fair chances of appeal being

fnally allowed. In conseyuence, substantive sentence

imposed on the appellant (Original Accused No.2) in

POCSO Special Case No.508 of 2016 by the Special Judge,

POCSO Act, at Greater Bombay is suspended on the same

terms and conditions on which he was granted bail pending

trial but with fresh bail bonds.

9 Application is allowed and disposed of.

10 Call records and proceedings.

                                   (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)


Shivgan                                                     3/4
           19-IA-772-2021.odt




Shivgan                 4/4