Bombay High Court
Kalyan Manohar @ Bitu Sirsat vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 1 February, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
1/4 05-IA-380-23-IN-APEAL-94-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.380 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.94 OF 2023
Kalyan Manohar @ Bitu Sirsat .... Applicant
versus
State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents
.......
• Mr. Tejas Hilage, Advocate for Applicant.
• Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for the State/Respondent No.1.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 01st FEBRUARY, 2023
P.C. :
1. This is an application for bail pending final disposal of
the Appeal filed by the Applicant. The Applicant was convicted
and sentenced by the District Judge-4 and Special Judge
(POCSO) Act, Solapur, vide his Judgment and Order dated
09/01/2023 passed in Special Case No.06/2017.
Digitally
signed by
MANUSHREE
MANUSHREE V NESARIKAR
V NESARIKAR Date:
2. The Applicant was convicted for commission of offence
2023.02.03
16:54:36
+0530
punishable u/s 354(A)(i), 341, 452, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian
Nesarikar
2/4 05-IA-380-23-IN-APEAL-94-23.odt
Penal Code. The major sentence imposed on him was three years
besides imposition of fine. He was acquitted from the charges of
commission of offence punishable under the Scheduled Castes
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
3. Heard Mr. Tejas Hilage, learned counsel for the
Applicant and Mr. S. R. Agarkar, learned APP for the State.
4. The prosecution case is that the Appellant was
neighbour of the victim. The incident took place on 31/01/2017
at about 11.00 p.m. The victim was sleeping in the tin shed. Her
father and other family members were sleeping inside the house.
The Applicant entered the tin shed and outraged her modesty
and also assaulted her. When the scuffle was going on, son of
the victim (P.W.5) came there hearing the noise and saw the
incident. The victim's father (P.W.4) also came there and saw the
Applicant. On the next day, the victim went to the police station
and lodged her FIR. The investigation was carried out. The
Applicant faced the trial and was convicted as mentioned earlier.
3/4 05-IA-380-23-IN-APEAL-94-23.odt
5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the
Applicant is falsely implicated in this case because of politics. He
has not committed any offence. The incident is not witnessed by
anybody else and the victim is not telling the truth. He
submitted that the Applicant was on bail during trial and he has
not misused the same. There is no further allegation against the
Applicant. The Appeal is not likely to be decided within the
period of three years.
6. Learned APP opposed this application. According to
him, the victim was continuously being harassed. The incident is
also seen by the victim's son.
7. I have considered these submissions. The point raised
by both the sides will have to be considered at the final hearing
stage. The sentence imposed is short. The Appeal is not likely to
be decided within three years. The Applicant was on bail for
long period and there are no allegations of misuse of that liberty.
4/4 05-IA-380-23-IN-APEAL-94-23.odt
8. Considering these aspects, the Applicant can be
granted bail during pendency of his Appeal.
9. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
(i) During pendency and final disposal of the
Criminal Appeal No.94 of 2023, the Applicant is
directed to be released on bail on his furnishing
P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty
Thousand only), with one or two sureties in the
like amount.
(ii) The Applicant shall not cause any harassment to
the victim or her family.
(iii) Interim Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
