Bombay High Court
Kailas Vitthal Bendkuli vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 20 December, 2022
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
1 of 4 24-ia-2174-22
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2174 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 758 OF 2022
Kailas Vitthal Bendkuli ..Applicant.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents
__________
Mr. Divesh Mehani i/b. Aniket Vagal for Applicant.
Smt. M. R. Tidke, APP for State/Respondent No.1.
Mr. Rupesh K. Bobade (Appointed Advocate) for Respondent No.2.
__________
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 20th DECEMBER 2022
PC :
1. This is an application for bail pending final disposal of
Criminal Appeal No.758 of 2022 preferred by the applicant. The
Applicant has challenged the Judgment and order dated
15/06/2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge and
Special Judge (POCSO), Nashik, in Special Case (POCSO) No.4 of
2017.
2. The applicant was convicted for commission of offence
punishable under sections 354-A(1)(i) of the I.P.C. and under
Digitally
signed by
VINOD
VINOD BHASKAR
BHASKAR GOKHALE
GOKHALE Date:
2022.12.22
10:47:14 Gokhale
+0530
2 of 4 24-ia-2174-22
section 7 r/w. Section 8, as well as, Section 11 r/w. Section 12 of
the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (for short
'POCSO Act'). The major sentence imposed on him was for three
years besides imposition of fine.
3. Heard Shri. Divesh Mehani, learned counsel for the
Applicant, Smt. Tidke, learned APP for the State/Respondent No.1
and Shri. Rupesh Bobade, learned Appointed Advocate for the
Respondent No.2.
4. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that,
evidence of the victim is not supported by her parents. Their
evidence was important because, according to the prosecution
case, the applicant had taken the victim with him with their
permission. He submitted that the applicant was on bail during
trial and he has not misused that liberty. He was also granted
interim bail by this Court (Coram: A. S. Gadkari, J.) vide order
dated 12/07/2022. Even after that there are no allegations of any
misconduct on his part.
5. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 submitted that,
3 of 4 24-ia-2174-22
presumption U/s.29 of the POCSO Act is running against the
applicant. The evidence of the victim is sufficiently clear and,
therefore, the seriousness of the offence may be taken into
consideration.
6. Learned APP supported the submissions of learned
counsel for the Respondent No.2. However, she conceded that the
sentence is short.
7. I have considered these submissions and I have perused
the evidence annexed to this Appeal. In particular, I have perused
the evidence of PW-1 the victim and PW-2 her mother. Some
arguable points are raised by both the sides which will have to be
decided at the stage of final disposal of the Appeal. The applicant
was on bail during trial and there are no allegations of him
misusing that liberty. The sentence is short. The Appeal is not
likely to be decided within that period. Therefore, the applicant
can be granted bail during pendency of his Appeal.
8. Hence, the following order:
4 of 4 24-ia-2174-22
ORDER
i) During pendency and final disposal of Criminal
Appeal No.758 of 2022, the Applicant is directed
to be released on bail on his furnishing P. R. bond
in the sum of Rs.30000/- with one or two sureties
in the like amount.
ii) The Application is disposed of.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
