Bombay High Court
Appau Punnaswami Devendra vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 9 February, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
:1: 22.ia-2520-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2520 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1170 OF 2022
Appau Punnaswami Devendra ....Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents
-----
Mr. Keshav S. Chavan, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for the Respondent No.1-State.
-----
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 9th FEBRUARY, 2023
P.C. :
1. This is an application for bail pending appeal
preferred by the applicant. The applicant was convicted and
Digitally signed
by
PRADIPKUMAR
PRADIPKUMAR PRAKASHRAO
sentenced by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai
PRAKASHRAO DESHMANE
DESHMANE
Date:
2023.02.10
11:51:16 +0530
vide judgment and order dated 6.4.2022 passed in Sessions Case
No.239/2020. The applicant was convicted for commission of
offences punishable under Sections 376, 452, 324, 354, 509 of
IPC. The major sentence imposed on him was for ten years
besides imposition of fine.
1 of 3
Deshmane(PS)
:2: 22.ia-2520-22.odt
2. Heard Shri Keshav Chavan, learned counsel for the
applicant and Shri S.R. Agarkar, learned APP for the respondent
No.1-State.
3. The incident took place on 21.11.2019. The victim
was examined as PW-2. She had described that in that night the
appellant entered her house. He was drunk. He assaulted her
and committed rape on her. It was repeated on two occasions.
She informed the incident to her neighbour, went to the
hospital, then to the police station and then lodged her FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that
initially FIR was lodged on 22.11.2019 only under Section 354
of IPC. But, after five days, her supplementary statement was
recorded and the offence under Section 376 of IPC was added
based on her supplementary statement. He, therefore, submitted
that there is improvement in the story which shows that it is a
false case. He, therefore, prayed for grant of bail to the
applicant during pendency of his appeal.
5. Learned APP opposed this application and he relied
on the medical evidence corroborating the prosecution evidence.
2 of 3
:3: 22.ia-2520-22.odt
6. I have considered these submissions. I have also
perused the evidence of the victim PW-2 as well as the evidence
of the medical officers who are examined as PW-8 Dr. Vijayan
and PW-4 Dr. Chavan. The evidence of PW-4 mentions the
injuries suffered by the prosecutrix as follows:
"[i] Abrasion with black seat fallen off present on upper
surface, left shoulder of size 4 cm x 2.5 cm.;
[ii] contusion below left clavical of size 8 cm x 4 cm
greenish;
[iii] sutured wound of length of size 3 cm on left parietal
region;
[iv] contusion present on both eyes of size 3 cm x 2.5
cm, blueish black."
7. The opinion was consistent with the old sexual
intercourse with assault. This evidence does support the
prosecution case. The evidence of PW-8 shows that she had
nasal swelling and tenderness. Those were fresh injuries. Thus,
the medical evidence supports the ocular evidence. No case for
bail is made out. The application is rejected.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
Deshmane (PS)
3 of 3
