Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mahadeo Mallesha Birajdar And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 12230 Bom

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 12230 Bom
Judgement Date : 28 November, 2022

Bombay High Court
Mahadeo Mallesha Birajdar And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 28 November, 2022
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
                                 1/4          03.IA-3945-22-APEAL-1151-22.odt

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                     INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3945 OF 2022
                                     IN
                       CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1151 OF 2022

   Mahadeo Mallesha Birajdar and Ors.                  .... Applicants
              versus
   State of Maharashtra and Anr.                       .... Respondents
                                 .......

   •     Mr. Vikrant V. Phatate, Advocate for Applicant.
   •     Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for the State/Respondent No.1.

                                 CORAM   : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
                                 DATE    : 28th NOVEMBER, 2022

   P.C. :

   1.               The Applicants were tried before Additional Sessions

        Judge (Special POCSO Court Solapur) in Sessions Case No.122

        of 2017 vide Judgment and Order dated 01.11.2022. The

        Applicant No.1 was convicted for commission of offence

        punishable under Section 8 of Protection of Children from

        Sexual Offence Act (for short 'POCSO') and was sentenced to

        suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years besides the

        imposition of fine. All the Applicants were convicted for

        commission of offence punishable under Sections 363 read with

Shabnoor




  ::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2022                 ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2022 14:18:49 :::
                                2/4           03.IA-3945-22-APEAL-1151-22.odt

      Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and were

      sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years

      besides imposition of fine. They are acquitted from the offence

      punishable under Sections 341, 366A read with Section 34 of

      IPC. The Applicant No.1 was acquitted from offence punishable

      under Section 354A of IPC and of the offence punishable under

      Section 12 of POCSO Act.


 2.               Learned counsel for the Applicants submitted that they

      were on bail during trial. They have not misused that liberty. He

      further submitted that even after conviction they were granted

      Interim Bail under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal

      Procedure. According to him the prosecution case is not proved

      beyond reasonable doubt. At the time of incident, the victim

      was of 17 years and 11 months old.           Her date of birth was

      14.02.1999 and the incident had taken place on 03.02.2017.

      Her evidence shows that the Applicant No.1 was a relative.


 3.               According to the prosecution case, the victim's house

      was at some distance from her college. The applicant No.1 came




::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2022                  ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2022 14:18:49 :::
                                3/4           03.IA-3945-22-APEAL-1151-22.odt

      in a car and offered to drop her to her house.                     He was

      accompanied by the applicant No.3. Based on their offer, the

      victim sat in the car. The applicant No.1 was her relative. After

      some time, the applicant No.3 got down and the applicant No.2

      entered the car. It is alleged that the applicant No.1 assaulted

      and threatened the victim. She was taken to Muchandi village

      where the car broke down. The villagers got suspicious and

      informed the police.        In the meantime, the offence was

      registered at Vijapurnaka police station vide C.R. No.68/2017.

      The officers of that police station went to Jat police station. The

      applicant Nos.1 & 2 were arrested.        The applicant No.3 was

      arrested subsequently.


 4.               Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that no-

      body from Muchandi village was examined.               Even the police

      officers from Jat police station were not examined.


 5.               Considering these submissions, learned counsel for the

      applicants has made out a case for interim protection till the

      respondent No.2 is served.




::: Uploaded on - 30/11/2022                  ::: Downloaded on - 30/11/2022 14:18:49 :::
                                      4/4               03.IA-3945-22-APEAL-1151-22.odt

 6.               Hence, the following order :


                                           ORDER

(i) Issue notice to the Respondent No.2, returnable on 10.01.2023.

(ii) In addition, the Investigating Officer shall inform the Respondent No.2 about pendency of this Application, the Appeal and the next date of listing. He shall make a statement to that effect on the next occasion.

(ii) Till the next date, the Applicants are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) each, with one or two sureties each in the like amount.

(iv) This order shall operate till 10.01.2023.

                   (v)         Stand over to 10.01.2023.




                                                         (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)





 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter