Bombay High Court
Ansar Shah S/O Sattar Shah vs State Of Mah. Thr. Govt. Pleader ... on 23 August, 2022
Bench: Manish Pitale, Valmiki Sa Menezes
1 904-APPA-566-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPA) NO.566 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.450 OF 2022
ANSAR SHAH S/O SATTAR SHAH
Vrs.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order
Coram, appearances, Court's Orders
or directions and Registrar's order
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S. V. Sirpurkar, Advocate for applicant.
Shri I. J. Damle, A. P. P. for Non-applicant-State.
CORAM:- MANISH PITALE AND
VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.
DATED :- 23/08/2022.
1. At the outset, when this application was
called out, Shri I. J. Damle, learned APP has handed over
reply on behalf of the Non-applicant-State, it is taken on
record.
2. The appeal of the applicant came to be
admitted by order dated 14/07/2022.
3. On this application for suspension of sentence
and for grant of bail, notice was issued on the same day
and it was directed that the application could be
circulated on receipt of record and proceedings.
4. We have heard Shri S. V. Sirpurkar, learned
counsel appearing for the applicant. He submits that in the
present case, there is delay in registration of FIR. There is
2 904-APPA-566-22.odt
material on record to indicate that there was illicit
relationship between the applicant and the prosecutrix
and it was in this backdrop that the applicant was sought
to be falsely implicated by the husband of the prosecutrix
and it is further submitted that the medical evidence, as
also, the CA reports do not support the story of the
prosecution.
5. On the other hand, learned APP has
vehemently opposed the present application indicating
that the applicant is found guilty in heinous offence of
rape. It is submitted that although there is delay in
registration of aforesaid FIR, it is properly explained and
that there is no substance in the submission of false
implication sought to be raised on behalf of the applicant.
6. We have considered the rival submissions in
the backdrop of the impugned Judgment and order passed
by the Sessions Court, as also upon perusal of the
depositions of the relevant witnesses.
7. We find that while the incident in the present
case occurred on 28/07/2016 and the FIR came to be
lodged after 3 days i.e. on 31/07/2016. Although delay in
registration of FIR would not be fatal, we find that the
explanation given for delay in registration of FIR, prima
facie, appears to be doubtful and that the Sessions Court
has simply accepted the same without taking into
consideration the fact that there was two days delay in
registration of FIR.
3 904-APPA-566-22.odt
8. Apart from this, the examination of the
prosecutrix did not indicate any injuries and the CA
reports have also belied the claim of the prosecution.
9. One witness i.e. PW-4 - Tanvir Ahemad Sk.
Hamid has indicated towards talks in the locality about
the illicit relationship between the applicant and the
prosecutrix. In the statement recorded under Section 313
of the Cr.P.C., the applicant has not simply denied the
allegations, but in his explanation, on the last question, he
did say that the husband of the prosecutrix has falsely
implicated him due to his illicit relationship with the
prosecutrix.
10. We are of the opinion that the aforesaid
factors demonstrate a prima facie case, in favour of the
the applicant and therefore, a case for grant of bail is
made out.
11. In view of the above, the application is
allowed. The sentence shall be suspended during the
pendency of the appeal.
12. It is directed that the applicant be released on
bail on furnishing PR bond of 25,000/- with one solvent
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial
Court.
4 904-APPA-566-22.odt
13. Additionally, it is directed that as a condition
for grant of bail, the applicant shall not reside in Majlapur,
Tq. and Dist. Akola, during the pendency of the appeal.
[VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.] [MANISH PITALE, J.]
Choulwar
Digitally signed by
VITHAL VITHAL MAROTRAO
MAROTRAO CHOULWAR
Date: 2022.08.24
CHOULWAR 18:57:44 +0530
