Vijay Yadav Thakare vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 24360 Bom

Bombay High Court

Vijay Yadav Thakare vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 19 August, 2024

Author: Sarang V. Kotwal

Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal

                                  :1:                               1-i-IA-907-24.odt

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                     INTERIM APPLICATION NO.907 OF 2024
                                     IN
                       CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.199 OF 2024

 Vijay Yadav Thakare                                         .....Applicant
            Versus
 The State of Maharashtra
 and another                                                 .... Respondents
                               -----
 Mr. Chandrakant S. Shirsat, Advocate for the Applicant.
 Mr. Vinit A. Kulkarni, APP for the Respondent-State.
                               -----

                                        CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

                                        DATE   : 19th AUGUST, 2024
 P.C. :

 1.                   This is an application for bail pending Appeal.

 The Applicant was the accused before the Special Judge

 under the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act,

 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act') in Special POCSO Case

 No.161/2021. The learned Judge, vide the judgment and

 order          dated    18.1.2024,      convicted   the     Applicant          for

 commission of the offences punishable under Sections 451,

 354 and 354-A of IPC. The major sentence imposed on him

 was RI for two years besides imposition of fine.                             The
                                                                                1 of 3



      Deshmane(PS)




::: Uploaded on - 20/08/2024                         ::: Downloaded on - 21/08/2024 05:13:07 :::
                                :2:                              1-i-IA-907-24.odt

 Applicant was acquitted from the charges of commission of

 offences punishable under the POCSO Act.


 2.               Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that

 the Applicant was on bail during the trial and he has not

 misused that liberty.         Even after his conviction, he was

 granted bail for a temporary period under Section 389 of

 Cr.P.C. by the trial Court.         He submitted that the deposition

 of the victim suffers from infirmity. She has admitted that

 she has deposed before the learned Magistrate while giving

 her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. as she was told by

 the police what she should depose before the Court. Even

 her FIR was recorded when she was frightened.


 3.               Since the victim is made the Respondent No.2

 and the initial charges were under the POCSO Act, I am

 inclined to issue notice to the Respondent No.2 before

 passing any final order in this Interim Application for bail

 pending Appeal.


 4.               Hence, the following order:


                                                                            2 of 3




::: Uploaded on - 20/08/2024                     ::: Downloaded on - 21/08/2024 05:13:07 :::
                                :3:                         1-i-IA-907-24.odt

                                ORDER

(i) Issue notice to the Respondent No.2, returnable on

30.9.2024. The investigating officer shall inform the

Respondent No.2 about the next date of listing and

shall make a statement before the Court to that effect

on the next occasion.

(ii) Till that date, the order of suspension of sentence

passed by the trial Court, after the Applicant's

conviction, shall continue on the same terms.

(iii) Stand over to 30.9.2024.

(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)

3 of 3