Bombay High Court
Ijaj Ahamed @ Furtila Abdul Matin ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 6 April, 2022
Bench: Prakash Deu Naik
6-ia-754-755-22inapl-226-22.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 754 OF 2022
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 755 OF 2022
SHALIKRAM
Digitally signed
by SHALIKRAM
PRALHADRAO
IN
PRALHADRAO BOREY
BOREY Date:
2022.04.08
CRI. APPEAL NO. 226 OF 2022
15:06:03 +0530
Ijaj Ahamed @ Furtila Abdul Matin Ansari ... Applicant/Appellant.
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents.
---
Mr. M. a. Khan, Advocate a/w. Mr. Tajammul Usmal, for the
Applicant/ Appellant.
Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for the State.
Ms. Priyanka Chavan, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3.
PSI - M. B. Tawde, Agripada Police Station, is present.
---
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 6th APRIL, 2022.
P. C. :
1. Both these Applications are preferred, seeking
suspension of sentence and grant of bail during the
pendency of the Appeal challenging the judgment of
conviction dated 27.01.2022 passed by the Special Judge,
under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012 at Mumbai in Special Case No 369 of 2016.
2. The Applicant/Appellant has been convicted for
the offence punishable under sections 10 & 12 of the POCSO
Spborey/-
1 of 5
6-ia-754-755-22inapl-226-22.doc
Act, under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and under
section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The
Applicant has been sentenced to suffer rigorous
imprisonment for the year of 5 years and 3 years
respectively on each count. No separate sentence of
imprisonment has been awarded for the offence punishable
under section 354 of the IPC.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the victim
girls are minors. While they were playing, the accused had
insisted that they should visit his house and all of them were
shown pornographic pictures/video by the applicant -accused
from his cell phone. It is also alleged that the accused had
touched them inappropriately and while leaving caught their
hands. The FIR was registered. The Applicant-accused was
arrested and chargesheet was filed.
4. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted
that the prosecution has examined two victims. The
Applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The
sentence is of short term. No act of outraging modesty is
attributed to the Applicant. FIR is lodged on the ground of
rivalry. There is delay of 12 days in lodging the FIR.
5. Learned APP and learned Advocate representing
the Respondent No. 2 & 3 have opposed the prayer for
suspension of sentence. It is submitted that the accused has
forced the victim girls to visit his house and shown them
Spborey/-
2 of 5
6-ia-754-755-22inapl-226-22.doc
pornographic videos. The accused made the victims to sit
on the bed and showed obscene movie on his phone. The
forensic expert's report with contents of the cell phone
supports the prosecution case. The poronographic video /
files were found in the Applicants cell phone. The accused
had caught hand of victim girls and asked them whether
they did not like the video. Although, the prosecution
examined two victims, there were four victims. There is
sufficient evidence showing the involvement of the
Applicant- accused in the crime. Cell phone of the applicant
was recovered during the course of investigation. Act
attributed to the Applicant is serious.
6. The Appeal preferred by the Applicant has been
admitted. The Applicant was on bail during the trial. There
is no adverse report that the Applicant had misused facility
of bail. The prosecution case is that there were four girls,
who had attributed similar role to the Applicant. Two of them
were examined. The accused had allegedly shown obscene
video to victims. Appeal would not be listed for hearing
within short time. The Applicant has challenged the
judgment of conviction on various grounds.
7. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, the
sentence of imprisonment can be suspended, pending the
appeal.
Spborey/-
3 of 5
6-ia-754-755-22inapl-226-22.doc
ORDER
i. Interim Application Nos. 754 & 755 of 2022 are
allowed.
ii. The sentence of imprisonment imposed vide
judgment and order dated 27.01.2022 passed by the
Special Judge, under the POCSO Act, in Special Case
No. 369 of 2016, is suspended and the Applicant is
directed to be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in
the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one or more sureties in the
like amount.
iii. The Applicant is permitted to furnish cash bail in
the sum of Rs.20,000/- for a period of eight weeks in
lieu of surety.
iv. The Applicant shall attend the trial Court once in
six months on first Saturday of the month till the final
disposal of the Appeal.
v. In the event, there are two consecutive defaults of
the Applicant/Appellant in attending the trial Court, the
said fact may be brought to the notice of this Court and
in such eventuality, the prosecution will be at liberty to
prefer an application for cancellation of bail.
Spborey/-
4 of 5
6-ia-754-755-22inapl-226-22.doc
vi. The Applicant shall not approach the victim girls
and shall not cause any harassment to them.
vii. Both the Interim Applications are disposed of in
the above terms.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
.....
Spborey/-
5 of 5
