Somnath Tulshiram Mohite vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 9541 Bom

                                                  1/3           04-IA-3082-22-IN-APEAL-920-22.odt

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                     INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3082 OF 2022
                                                     IN
                                       CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.920 OF 2022

                       Somnath Tulshiram Mohite                          .... Applicant

                                     versus

                       State of Maharashtra & Anr.                       .... Respondents
                                                        .......

                       •     Mr. Mahendra N. Sandhyanshiv, Advocate for Applicant.
                       •     Mr. Yogesh Y. Dabke, APP for the State/Respondent No.1.

                                                CORAM       : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

                                                DATE        : 20th SEPTEMBER, 2022

                       P.C. :

1. This is an application for bail pending disposal of

Criminal Appeal filed by the Applicant. The Applicant was

convicted by Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, vide

Judgment and Order dated 02/08/2022 passed in Sessions Case

No.113 of 2011. The Applicant was convicted for commission of

offence punishable u/s 376, 363, 366 of the Indian Penal Code.

The major punishment imposed on him was rigorous Digitally signed by MANUSHREE MANUSHREE V V NESARIKAR NESARIKAR Date:

2022.09.22

imprisonment for 10 years besides imposition of fine. 12:14:33 +0530

Nesarikar 2/3 04-IA-3082-22-IN-APEAL-920-22.odt

2. Heard Mr. Mahendra N. Sandhyanshiv, learned counsel

for the Applicant and Mr. Yogesh Y. Dabke, learned APP for the

State.

3. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the

incident had allegedly taken place in July 2011 and when the

FIR was lodged, the victim was sent for medical examination. At

that time, she was found to be pregnant for two months. Learned

counsel for the Applicant submits that this means that the

Applicant had nothing do with her pregnancy. He submitted that

the offence is old and the Applicant was on bail during the trial.

He has not misused the liberty. He therefore submitted that the

bail be granted to the Applicant pending disposal of the Appeal.

4. Learned APP opposed this application. He submitted

that the offence is serious. The evidence of the victim is

sufficient to base the conviction of the Applicant.

5. I have considered these submissions. I have also

perused the evidence of the victim, who is examined as P.W.1. At 3/3 04-IA-3082-22-IN-APEAL-920-22.odt

the time of incident, she was around 14 years of age. Her date of

birth was 18/05/1997 and the allegations pertain to the incident

dated 13/07/2011. According to her, on that day she

accompanied the Applicant to Shirdi. The Applicant had

threatened her. They went to a room where he committed rape

on her against her wish. After that, he went out. The victim was

frightened. She made a telephonic call to her father through a

coin box and then she was rescued. Thereafter the FIR was filed.

At the time of medical examination she was found to be two

months pregnant. However she has explained that the Applicant

had committed said act on 2 to 3 occasion even earlier at her

residence. All these issues will have to be considered at the stage

of final hearing. However, considering the seriousness of the

incident and sufficient evidence given by the victim, no case for

bail is made out. The application for bail is therefore rejected.

The Appeal is expedited.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)