Bombay High Court
Abdul Rashid Abdul Rauf Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 10 August, 2022
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
:1: 44.ia-1698-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1698 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.571 OF 2022
Abdul Rashid Abdul Rauf Shaikh ..... Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents
-----
Mr. Prashant Jadhav, Advocate i/b. Syed Shabana M. Ali, for the
Applicant.
Smt. J.S. Lohokare, APP for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Vishal Kanade, Advocate (appointed) for Respondent No.2.
-----
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 10th AUGUST, 2022
P.C. :
Digitally signed
by
PRADIPKUMAR
PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO
1. This is an application for bail during pendency and
PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE
DESHMANE
Date:
2022.08.12
10:17:43 +0530
final disposal of Criminal Appeal No.571/2022. The applicant
was convicted and sentenced by the Special Judge under POCSO
Act, Greater Mumbai vide his judgment and order dated
11.5.2022. The applicant was convicted for commission of offence
punishable under Section 10 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offices Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and was sentenced to suffer
R.I. for five years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default to
1 of 4
Deshmane(PS)
:2: 44.ia-1698-22.odt
undergo R.I. for two months. He was convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 354 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer
R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to
suffer RI for one month. He was also convicted under Section
354(A) of IPC, but, no separate sentence was imposed in view of
the sentence imposed under Section 10 of the POCSO Act. The
sentences were directed to run concurrently. Thus, the maximum
sentence is five years.
2. Heard Shri Prashant Jadhav, learned counsel for the
applicant, Smt. J.S. Lohokare, learned APP for the Respondent
No.1-State and Shri Vishal Kanade, learned counsel appointed for
the Respondent No.2.
3. The prosecution case is that the victim was about
twelve years of age on the date of the incident i.e. on 17.3.2018.
The applicant was having a book-binding shop near the victim's
house. The victim went to his shop for bringing back her book. It
is her allegation that the applicant touched her private parts
inappropriately. He touched her body at different places. She got
scared and ran back to her house. She narrated the incident to her
mother and thus the FIR was lodged.
2 of 4
:3: 44.ia-1698-22.odt
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the
applicant is seventy-three years of age. He has no criminal
antecedents. He was on bail during trial and there are no
allegations of misuse of that liberty. The sentence is five years and
the appeal is not likely to reach final hearing stage within that
period. He submitted that the applicant is falsely implicated
because of the financial dispute.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submitted
that the applicant examined himself as defence witness No.1. In
the cross-examination he admitted that he had no record of any
order having been placed by the victim's father and hence there
was no financial transaction. The defence is false. Even his
daughter, who is examined as DW-2 could not establish that there
was any financial transaction. Learned APP also supported the
same arguments.
6. I have considered these submissions. The appeal is
already admitted and all these aspects will have to be determined
at the final hearing stage. The three factors which I am
considering at this stage are that (i) the applicant is 73 years of
age, (ii) he was on bail during trial and has not misused that
3 of 4
:4: 44.ia-1698-22.odt
liberty and (iii) considering the short sentence the appeal is not
likely to be taken up for final hearing within that period. The
matter needs to be looked at on these aspects. Considering all
these aspects, the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail
during hearing and final disposal of appeal. Hence, the following
order :
:: O R D E R ::
i. During hearing and final disposal of Criminal Appeal
No.571/2022, the applicant is directed to be released on
bail on his furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/-
(Rupees Thirty Thousand Only) with one or two sureties
in the like amount.
ii. The applicant shall not harass the victim or her family in
any manner.
iii. Payment of fine amount is not stayed.
iv. The Application is disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
Deshmane (PS)
4 of 4
