Bombay High Court
Laxman Gorakh Pitekar vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 12 October, 2021
Bench: Anuja Prabhudessai
P.H. Jayani 09 IA443.2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 443 OF 2021
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 124 OF 2021
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 124 OF 2021
Laxman Gorakh Pitekar .... Applicant
v/s.
The State of Maharashtra and anr. .... Respondents
Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam for the Applicant.
Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for the State.
Mr. Sandeep R. Karnik for Respondent No.2.
CORAM: SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.
DATED : 12th OCTOBER, 2021.
P. C. :-
. This is an Application under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. for suspension
of substantive sentence imposed by judgment dated 22/12/2020
passed by the learned Special Judge, Satara in Special (Child) Case
No.51/2014.
2. By the impugned judgment, the learned Special Judge has held
the Applicant guilty of offences under sections 363, 377, 504, 506 of
the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and has sentenced him as
P.H. Jayani 09 IA443.2021.doc
under :-
(a) seven years of rigorous imprisonment with fine of
Rs.500/- for offence under section 4 of POCSO Act in
default to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days ;
(b) two years of rigorous imprisonment with fine of
Rs.500/- in default simple imprisonment for 15 days for
offence under section 377 of the Indian Penal Code ;
(c) one year of rigorous imprisonment with fine of
Rs.500/- in respect of each of the offences under section
363, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code in default simple
imprisonment for one month.
3. Heard Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam, learned counsel for the Applicant,
Mr. S.V. Gavand, learned APP for the State and Mr. Sandeep R. Karnik,
learned counsel for Respondent No.2. I have perused the records and
considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsels for the
respective parties.
4. The Applicant herein was prosecuted for committing offence
P.H. Jayani 09 IA443.2021.doc
under section 363, 377, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
3 and 4 of the POCSO Act. The crime against the Applicant was
registered pursuant to the first information report lodged by the
mother of the victim on 19/05/2014. The accusations against the
Applicant are that on 19/05/2014, he took the son of the first
informant who was below the 18 years of age, to a shed at
Daulatnagar, Pilleshwar Nagar and subjected the victim who was a
child within the meaning of section 2(d) of POCSO Act, to carnal
intercourse. The evidence of the victim prima facie indicates that the
Applicant had subjected him to carnal intercourse.
5. The victim had identified the Applicant in the identification
parade which was held within 15 days from the date of the incident.
Moreover, the victim had also identified the Applicant in the Court.
The victim had stated that the perpetrator of the crime had tattoo mark
on his right forearm. It is to be noted that the MLC papers, genuineness
of which is not in dispute, indicate that the Applicant was medically
examined on 21/05/2015 and the Doctor has recorded that there was a
tattoo mark 'Prasad' on the right forearm of the Applicant.
6. The evidence of Dr. Jyoti Anandrao Jadhav - PW6 also reveals
P.H. Jayani 09 IA443.2021.doc
that she had medically examined the victim. She had found a tear of
skin over external anus at 6 O clock position of size 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm,
redness and diffuse Odema of annal margin and muscle dilated and
tender on touch. The medical evidence also prima facie supports the
case of the prosecution.
7. It is also on record that the Applicant is facing trial in Special
(POCSO) Case No.47/2017 for similar offences. Considering the nature
of the accusations, the evidence in support thereof and keeping in mind
the societal interest, this is not a fit case for suspension of sentence
and/or releasing the Applicant on bail. Hence, the Application is
dismissed.
PREETI
(SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)
H JAYANI
Digitally signed by
PREETI H JAYANI
Date: 2021.10.14
16:13:45 +0530
