Bombay High Court
Anil Madhukar Dombale vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 8 March, 2022
Bench: Prakash Deu Naik
1 of 3 6.IA462.2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.462 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.126 OF 2022
Anil Madhukar Dombale Applicant
versus
The State of Maharashtra and another Respondents
Mr.Kuldeep Patil i/by Ms.Heena Suvarnakar, Advocate for applicant.
Mr.S.V.Gavand, APP, for State.
CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
DATE : 8th March 2022
PC :
1. The applicant is seeking suspension of sentence and grant of
bail pending Criminal Appeal No.126l of 2022 challenging judgment
of conviction.
2. The applicant has been convicted vide judgment and order
dated 5th March 2021 in Special Case (POCSO) No.92 of 2018 by
Extra Joint District Judge & Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli for
offence under Section 354-A(1)(i) of Indian Penal Code and under
Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and
sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine
of Rs.10,000/-. He has been acquitted for the offence u/s.341 of IPC
MANISH Digitally signed by
MANISH SURESH
and under Section 12 of POCSO Act.
SURESH THATTE
Date: 2022.03.10
THATTE 10:46:42 +0530
3. The prosecution case is that on 25 th August 2018 at about 8.30
am, the applicant-accused had obstructed the victim while
2 of 3 6.IA462.2022.doc
proceeding on the road and tried to drag her in cattle shed and told
her to sleep with him. The victim shouted. Her relatives came on
spot. The accused ran away from spot.
4. The applicant was on bail during trial. On the date of
conviction sentence of conviction has been suspended by the Trial
Court in accordance with Section 389 of Cr.P.C.. The applicant has
been arrested subsequently on 18 th July 2021 and since then he is in
custody.
5. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that there is no
misuse of the facility of bail granted during trial. The sentence is of
short term.
6. Learned APP and learned advocate for respondent no.2
submitted that there is sufficient evidence to convict applicant. The
victim has attributed specific role to the applicant. He has been
convicted for the offence u/s.354 of IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act.
7. Undisputedly the applicant was on bail during trial. Even on
the date of conviction, the conviction was suspended. There is no
adverse report of misuse of facility of bail. The applicant is in
custody from July-2021. In view of these circumstances case for
suspension of sentence and grant of bail is made out.
ORDER
(i) The sentence of imprisonment imposed vide judgment and
order dated 5th March 2021 in Special Case (POCSO) No.92 of 2018
by Extra Joint District Judge & Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli is
3 of 3 6.IA462.2022.doc
suspended, and applicant is directed to be released on bail on
executing PR bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one or more
sureties in the like amount;
(ii) The applicant is permitted to furnish cash bail in the sum of
Rs.20,000/- for ten weeks in lieu of sureties;
(iii) The applicant shall attend Trial Court once in six months on
first Saturday of the month till final disposal of the Criminal Appeal;
(iv) In the event there are two consecutive defaults in attending
the Trial Court, the Trial Court shall submit report to this Court;
(v) In the event of default committed by the applicant in attending
the Trial Court, the prosecution will be at liberty to prefer application
for cancellation of bail.
(PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)
MST
