Dhanraj Ganpat Kuttarmare vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Pso Ps ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5818 Bom

                        1/4                                  APEAL-20.21.odt-Judgment




         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                  CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 20                     OF 2021

APPELLANT :-                      Dhanraj Ganpat Kuttarmare, Aged about
(In Jail)                         32 years, Occ. Labour, R/o. Ward No.3,
                                  At Maloda, Post Ambhora (Khurd),
                                  Ambhorakala, Tah. Kuhi, District Nagpur.

                                     ...VERSUS...

RESPONDENTS :-                1] State of Maharashtra, through Police
                                 Station Officer, Police Station, Veltur,
                                 Tah. Kuhi, District Nagpur.

                              2] Ku.Prachi Sheshrao Meshram, Aged 21
                                 years, R/o. Maloda, Tah.Kuhi, District
                                 Nagpur.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Mr. Raju Kadu, Advocate for the appellant.
            Mr. S.D.Shirpurkar, A.P.P. for the respondent No.1.
                         None for the respondent No.2.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       CORAM : Z.A.HAQ AND AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED : 31.03.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Amit B. Borkar, J.)

1. Heard.

2. ADMIT.

3. This is an appeal filed under Section 14-A of the

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

KHUNTE 2/4 APEAL-20.21.odt-Judgment

Act, 1989 challenging the order dated 03/09/2020 passed by the

Additional Sessions Judge-11, Nagpur in Miscellaneous Criminal

Application No.2059 of 2020 for the offences punishable under sections

376(1) and 506 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and

section 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(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 came to be registered against

the appellant with the accusations that on 06/03/2020 at 1.00 am in

the morning, the respondent No.2 went out of her house to ease herself.

The appellant, who already had inimical terms with the family of the

respondent No.2, came near her and gagged her mouth. It is alleged

that the appellant took out one bottle and threatened the respondent

No.2 to kill her, as there was poison in the bottle. It is further alleged

that the appellant thereafter removed clothes of the respondent No.2

and committed forcible sexual intercourse with her and ran away. The

First Information Report was, therefore, filed on 06/03/2020. The

appellant was arrested on 06/03/2020 itself. The appellant therefore,

filed an application under section 439 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure seeking regular bail in relation to Crime No.59 of 2020. The

learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order rejected Miscellaneous

Criminal Application No.2059 of 2020. The appellant has, therefore,

filed the present appeal challenging the order dated 03/09/2020.

KHUNTE
                      3/4                          APEAL-20.21.odt-Judgment



5.            This   Court   on   13/01/2021     issued   notice   to   the

respondents and granted provisional bail to the appellant. The

respondent No.1 filed reply contesting the application under section

439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is stated that there is

sufficient evidence available with the prosecution to establish the guilt

of the appellant in the crime alleged against the appellant. It is stated

that the appellant may misuse the liberty granted to him if he is

released on bail.

6. The respondent No.2 though served with notice of appeal,

has neither appeared personally, nor through an Advocate in the present

appeal.

7. We have carefully considered the impugned order passed

by the learned Sessions Judge and material submitted in the form of

charge-sheet. On careful consideration of material available on record,

it appears that the appellant-accused is aged about 32 years and the

respondent No.2-victim is aged about 21 years. The medical

examination report does not show any injuries over the person of

victim, except on genitals though it is alleged that the appellant forcibly

committed sexual intercourse with the respondent No.2. The charge-

sheet is already filed. The investigation is complete. The appellant has

stated that there are no criminal antecedents against the appellant to

his discredit. After the release of the appellant on provisional bail on

KHUNTE 4/4 APEAL-20.21.odt-Judgment

13/01/2021, it is not pointed by the learned A.P.P. that the appellant has

misused the liberty granted to him.

8. We, therefore, pass the following order:

i) The impugned order dated 03/09/2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-11, Nagpur in Miscellaneous Criminal Application No.2059 of 2020 is quashed and set aside.

ii) The order granting provisional bail dated 13/01/2021 is hereby confirmed, subject to the same conditions stated in the said order.

8. The criminal appeal is allowed in the above terms.

                           (AMIT B. BORKAR, J)                        (Z.A.HAQ, J)



     Ghanshyam
     Khunte
     Digitally signed by
     Ghanshyam
     Khunte
     Date: 2021.04.06
     13:58:22 +0530




KHUNTE