Bombay High Court
Mukesh Mangaldas Kumawat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 11 August, 2023
Bench: S. G. Mehare
2023:BHC-AUG:17222
1 959-Cri.Appln.3018-23+1.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
959 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3018 OF 2023
IN REVN/234/2023 WITH REVN/234/2023
MUKESH MANGALDAS KUMAWAT
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Thorat Nanabhau R.
APP for Respondent-State : Mr. S. B. Narwade.
...
CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.
DATE : 11.08.2023
PER COURT :-
1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned
APP for the respondent-State.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the
evidence produced by the prosecution was not sufficient to
prove the offences punishable under Sections 354, 342 and
452 of the IPC. The intention to outrage her modesty as
alleged by the prosecution was missing and there was no
material to believe that the applicant had knowledge that due
to his acts, the modesty of a woman was likely to be outraged.
A short term sentence has been imposed upon the applicant to
::: Uploaded on - 11/08/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 12/08/2023 10:46:50 :::
2 959-Cri.Appln.3018-23+1.odt
suffer S.I. for one year each for the offences punishable under
Sections 354, 452 and six months for the offence punishable
under Section 342 of the IPC. The applicant is law abiding
person. Hence, the sentence may be suspended.
3. Per contra, the learned APP would submit that the
clinching and cogent evidence was placed before the Court.
Hence, both Courts have believed the prosecution case. There
is no scope to argue in the revision application. Both orders
impugned before this Court are legally correct, proper and
appropriate. Hence, the applicant may not be granted
suspension.
4. Perused the impugned judgments and orders. There
appears grounds for argument whether the intention to
outrage the modesty was cogently proved. The applicant was
on the bail throughout the trial. The applicant has roots in
village Waluj, District Aurangabad. Considering the term of
the imprisonment, the Court is of the view that this is a fit case
to exercise the discretion under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C.
Hence, the following order :
::: Uploaded on - 11/08/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 12/08/2023 10:46:50 :::
3 959-Cri.Appln.3018-23+1.odt
ORDER
(i) Criminal Application is allowed.
(ii) The execution, implementation, effect and
operation of the sentence imposed upon the
applicant by the learned Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Court No.16, Aurangabad, in R.C.C.
No.1507 of 2016 by its judgment and order dated
29.09.2018 and confirmed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in
Criminal Appeal No.176 of 2018, dated
08.08.2023 has been suspended till the conclusion
of the criminal revision application.
(iii) The applicant be released on bail on executing P.B.
and S.B. of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand
only) with one solvent surety of like amount.
(iv) The applicant shall be released only after deposit
the fine, if not deposited.
(v) Bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Aurangabad.
4 959-Cri.Appln.3018-23+1.odt
(vi) Issue notice to the respondent/s, returnable on
05.10.2023. Learned APP waives service of notice
for the respondent-State.
(vii) Call Record and Proceedings.
(S. G. MEHARE, J.)
...
vmk/-
