Bombay High Court
Sagar Ramesh Jadhav vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 3 February, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
:1: 10-ii.ia-4531-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4531 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL [STAMP] NO.22258 OF 2022
Sagar Ramesh Jadhav ....Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents
-----
Ms. Hema M. Whaval, Advocate (appointed) for the
Applicant.
Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent No.1-State.
-----
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 3rd FEBRUARY, 2023
P.C. :
1. This is an application for bail pending final
disposal of the appeal.
2. The applicant was convicted and sentenced by
the Extra Jt. Additional Sessions Judge, Karad vide
judgment and order dated 17.1.2022 passed in Special Case
No.65/2018. The applicant was convicted for commission of
the offence punishable under Section 354-A of IPC and was
sentenced to suffer RI for one year and to pay fine of
1 of 4
Deshmane(PS)
:2: 10-ii.ia-4531-22.odt
Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for
three months. The applicant was also convicted for
commission of offence punishable under Section 7 read with
Section 8 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences
Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act') and was sentenced to
suffer RI for three years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and
in default of payment of fine to suffer RI for six months.
3. Heard Ms. Hema Whaval, Advocate (appointed)
for the applicant and Shri S.R. Agarkar, learned APP for the
respondent No.1-State.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that
because of his weak financial condition, the appeal could not
be filed within time. It was filed through the help of Legal
Services Authority of this Court. The delay in filing the
appeal is condoned by a separate order. The appeal is
already admitted. She submitted that the applicant is in
custody since 17.1.2022 after his conviction. He has spent
more than one year, out of the sentence of three years in
custody; serving out his sentence. She submitted that the
2 of 4
:3: 10-ii.ia-4531-22.odt
applicant was on bail during trial. She further submitted
that the two main witnesses i.e. the victim and her father
have not supported the prosecution case and, therefore, the
applicant deserves to be released on bail.
5. Learned APP very fairly supports her contention.
6. I have considered these submissions. The victim
is examined as PW-2 and her father is examined as PW-3.
The alleged incident was dated 29.9.2018. It is alleged that
the appellant took the victim in his arms in an agricultural
field. Based on these allegations, the FIR is lodged by PW-3.
However, during trial neither PW-3 i.e. the father of the
victim nor the victim herself who is examined as PW-2 has
supported the prosecution case.
7. Considering this, it does appear that the
applicant does have a very good case on merits for acquittal.
Inspite of that he is already in custody for more than one
year. Therefore, the applicant deserves to be released on bail
immediately.
8. Hence, the following order :
3 of 4
:4: 10-ii.ia-4531-22.odt
:: O R D E R ::
i. During pendency and final disposal of Criminal
Appeal (Stamp) No.22258/2022, the applicant is
directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R.
bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten
Thousand Only).
ii. The Superintendent of Jail and the trial Court shall
ensure that the applicant is released on bail as
expeditiously as possible.
iii. Interim Application is disposed of accordingly.
9. The Registry is directed to communicate this
order to the concerned Superintendent of Jail and the Trial
Court, forthwith
Digitally signed
by
PRADIPKUMAR
PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO
PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
DESHMANE Date:
2023.02.03
17:28:40
+0530
Deshmane (PS)
4 of 4
