Bombay High Court
Deepak Sahebrao Nazarkar vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 18 January, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
1/4 03-IA-4377-22-IN-APEAL-ST-21517-22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4377 OF 2022
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO.21517 OF 2022
Deepak Sahebrao Nazarkar .... Applicant
versus
State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents
.......
• Mr. G. S. Jadhav i/b. Mr. B. A. Aloor, Advocate for Applicant.
• Mr. S. R. Agarkar, APP for the State/Respondent No.1.
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 18th JANUARY, 2023
P.C. :
1. This is an application for bail pending final disposal of
the Applicant's Appeal.
2. Heard Mr. G. S. Jadhav i/b. Mr. B. A. Aloor, learned
counsel for the Applicant and Mr. S. R. Agarkar, learned APP for
the State.
Digitally
signed by
MANUSHREE
MANUSHREE V NESARIKAR
V NESARIKAR Date:
2023.01.19
11:30:35
+0530
Nesarikar
2/4 03-IA-4377-22-IN-APEAL-ST-21517-22.odt
3. The Applicant was convicted and sentenced by the
Special Judge under POCSO, vide his Judgment and Order dated
13/06/2022 in Special POCSO S.C. No.5/2017. The Applicant
was convicted for commission of offence punishable u/s 6 r/w 5
(j)(ii)(l) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012 and u/s 376(2)(n), 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The
major sentence imposed on him was rigorous imprisonment for
15 years besides imposition of fine. The fine amount was
directed to be paid to the victim as compensation.
4. Learned counsel submitted that the age of the victim is
not proved beyond reasonable doubt. There are indications that
it was a consensual love affair and therefore the Applicant
deserves to be acquitted and on this ground he also deserves to
be granted bail pending final disposal of his Appeal.
5. Learned APP opposed these submissions. He submitted
that the age of the victim is proved through the birth certificate
3/4 03-IA-4377-22-IN-APEAL-ST-21517-22.odt
as well as through ossification test. The victim has not accepted
the consensual relationship.
6. I have considered these submissions. The statement u/s
313 of Cr.P.C. of the Appellant mentions that there was a love
affair between him and the victim and they were to get married.
The Applicant quarreled with the victim's mother. He was asking
the dues of the rent of the room where the victim's family was
residing. He was asking that rent at the behest of the owner.
Because of this reason the victim's family got angry and
implicated him in the false offence. The evidence of the victim,
however, shows that her date of birth was 21/08/2002. The
incident took place in April 2016. Therefore, at that time she
was below 14 years of age. In her deposition she has clearly
stated that the Applicant had committed forcible intercourse and
there was no consent.
7. Therefore, at this stage, there is sufficiently strong
material against the Applicant and therefore he cannot be
4/4 03-IA-4377-22-IN-APEAL-ST-21517-22.odt
granted bail. The Bail Application is rejected. However,
considering the submission made by learned counsel for
Applicant, the hearing of the Appeal is expedited. The Applicant
is at liberty to file an application for fixing early date of hearing.
8. With these observations, the application is disposed of.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
