Bombay High Court
Vaijinath Asaram Panchal vs The State Of Maharashtra on 5 July, 2022
Bench: V. V. Kankanwadi
912(i)-appln-1943-2022.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1943 OF 2022
IN APEAL/440/2022
VAIJINATH ASARAM PANCHAL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Munde Sandeep D.
APP for Respondent - State : Mr. S. P. Sonpawale
...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.
DATE : 05.07.2022
ORDER :-
. Heard both the sides.
2. Though the learned Advocate for the appellant/applicant has not
produced the copies of evidence, it is to be noted that the
appellant/applicant has been convicted by the learned Special Judge
under POCSO Act, Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad in Special (POCSO) Case
No.21 of 2018 thus :-
(i) The appellant/applicant has been convicted
under Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure for the offence punishable under Section 451
of Indian Penal Code and thereby sentenced to suffer
rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of
Rs.1000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for
(1)
::: Uploaded on - 07/07/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 07/07/2022 23:50:17 :::
912(i)-appln-1943-2022.odt
fifteen days.
(ii) The appellant/applicant has been convicted
under Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure for the offence punishable under Section 354
of Indian Penal Code and thereby sentenced to suffer
rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of
Rs.1000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for
fifteen days.
3. The judgment would show that the learned Judge has not
considered the victim as child within the meaning of Section 2(d) of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter
referred to as the "POCSO Act"). Therefore, conviction is under Indian
Penal Code. In view of Kiran Kumar Vs. State of M. P., [(2001) 9 SCC
211], the sentence that has been awarded can be termed as small
sentence. It is less likely that the appeal would be taken up for final
hearing in the near future and, therefore, the application deserves to be
allowed. Hence, the following order :-
ORDER
I) The application is hereby allowed.
II) The substantive sentence imposed on the applicant in
Special (POCSO) Case No.21 of 2018 by learned Additional
Sessions Judge-1/Special Judge under POCSO Act, Vaijapur, Dist.
912(i)-appln-1943-2022.odt
Aurangabad on 27.05.2022 is hereby suspended till the hearing
and conclusion of Criminal Appeal No.440 of 2022.
III) The applicant be released on P.R. and S.B. of Rs.15,000/-
(Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) each.
IV) He shall not commit any offence.
V) The applicant shall remain present before the learned Trial
Judge once in six months, till final hearing and disposal of the
appeal, commencing from the date he tenders bail papers and
thereafter, the Trial Judge to fix dates for his subsequent
appearances.
VI) In case of two consecutive defaults on the part of the
applicant to remain present before the Trial Court, the Trial Court
to inform this Court about the same and in that eventuality, the
prosecution would be at liberty to file an application for
cancellation of the bail granted to the applicant.
VII) Bail before trial Court.
[SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.]
scm
