Bombay High Court
Hajiba Bairu Phonde vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 19 August, 2024
Author: Sarang V. Kotwal
Bench: Sarang V. Kotwal
2024:BHC-AS:33215
:1: 9-i-IA-1270-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1270 OF 2023
IN
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.400 OF 2023
Hajiba Bairu Phonde .....Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
and another .... Respondents
-----
Mr.Mohit Dalvi, Advocate i/b. Rakesh Bhatkar for the
Applicant.
Smt. Sangita D. Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State.
Ms. Meghna Gowalani, Advocate (appointed) for the
Respondent No.2.
-----
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2024
P.C. :
1. This is an Application for bail pending Appeal.
2. The Applicant was the original accused No.1 in
Special Case No.4/2022 before the Additional Sessions
Judge, Ratnagiri. The learned Judge vide the judgment and
order dated 10.3.2023 convicted the Applicant for
commission of the offence punishable under Section 7 read
with 8 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences
1 of 4
Deshmane(PS)
::: Uploaded on - 20/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 21/08/2024 05:13:14 :::
:2: 9-i-IA-1270-23.odt
Act, 2012 (for short, 'POCSO Act') read with 34 of IPC,
under Section 11 read with 12 of the POCSO Act read with
34 of IPC and under section 354-A and 354-B read with 34
of IPC. He was sentenced to suffer SI for three years, as a
major punishment besides imposition of fine amount.
3. Heard Mr.Mohit Dalvi, learned counsel for the
Applicant, Smt. Sangita Shinde, learned APP for the
Respondent-State and Ms. Meghna Gowalani, learned
appointed counsel for the Respondent No.2.
4. The prosecution case is that some boys were
following the victims on their motorcycle. The victims were
in the age group of 15 years. They were school going girls.
On the date of incident in February, 2022, two of the boys
came in a rickshaw and one of the boys pulled one of the
victims in the rickshaw. In the meantime, the crowed
gathered there and taking advantage of the crowd, the two
boys went away in that rickshaw.
2 of 4
::: Uploaded on - 20/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 21/08/2024 05:13:14 :::
:3: 9-i-IA-1270-23.odt
5. Learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that
he had not committed any offence. He is prosecuted on the
basis of suspicion. The Applicant was on bail during the trial
and he has not misused that liberty. Even after his
conviction, he was granted bail under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.
6. Learned APP and learned counsel for the
Respondent No.2 submitted that the offence is serious. There
is strong evidence against the Applicant.
7. The merits of the matter will have to be decided
at at the final hearing stage. However, the sentence imposed
on the Applicant is only for three years. The Appeal is not
likely to be decided during that period. The Applicant was
on bail during the trial. Even after his conviction, he was
granted bail under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. which was
continued by the earlier Benches of this Court on the
previous occasions. Considering this situation, The
Applicant can be granted bail pending his Appeal on certain
conditions. Hence, the following order:
3 of 4
::: Uploaded on - 20/08/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 21/08/2024 05:13:14 :::
:4: 9-i-IA-1270-23.odt
ORDER
(i) During pendency and final disposal of Criminal Appeal
No.400/2023, the Applicant is directed to be released
on bail on his executing 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 any of
the victims or their families.
(iii) Interim Application is disposed of accordingly.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
4 of 4
