Bombay High Court
Gopal S/O Manohar Waankhede vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Its Pos, ... on 8 October, 2024
2024:BHC-NAG:11371
61.apeal.375.2024.Judgment.odt
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.375 OF 2024
Gopal s/o Manohar Wankhede,
Age 25 Years, Occupation : Labourer,
R/o Kupta, Taluka Manora,
District Washim. ..... APPELLANT
// VERSUS //
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through its Police Station Officer,
Police Station, Manora,
District Washim.
2. XYZ Victim,
[Crime no.193/2024]
Through Police Station Manora,
District Washim. .... RESPONDENTS
----------------------------------------
Mr. T. S. Deshpande, Counsel for the appellant.
Mr. A. R. Chutke, APP for respondent No.1/State.
Mr. R. S. Bhalerao, appointed Counsel for respondent
No.2.
----------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED : 08.10.2024
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard.
2. Admit.
3. By this appeal, the appellant has challenged the order passed
by the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge,
61.apeal.375.2024.Judgment.odt
Mangrulpir in Criminal Bail Application No.68/2024 by which the
application of the present appellant for grant bail is rejected.
4. The crime is registered on the basis of report lodged by the
mother of the victim on an allegation that her daughter aged about
15 years has left the house and not returned back on 01.03.2024.
It is alleged that the appellant was in contact with the victim and on
the promise of marriage, he has kidnapped her. On the basis of the
said report, police have registered the crime initially, under Section
363 of the Indian Penal Code. During the investigation, the
statement of the victim was recorded, wherein she has alleged that
prior to one year, she got acquaintance with the present appellant
and present appellant has provided her mobile phone and was
communicating with her. As her parents disliked her communication
with the present appellant, they obtained the mobile phone from
her thereafter, the appellant has again provided her mobile phone
and she was communicating with him. On 01.03.2024, the
appellant threatened her and took her along with him and
thereafter, she travelled along with him at Digras, Digras to Pusad
and thereafter at Pune, wherein she resided along with him in
rented premises. There was a physical relationship between them
during those days. After recording the statement of the victim, the
crime was registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
61.apeal.375.2024.Judgment.odt
5. The appellant approached the learned Special Court for grant
of bail. Learned Special Court has rejected the application
considering that the victim is 15 years of age and her consent is not
relevant. Being aggrieved with the same, present appeal is
preferred by the appellant on the ground that there was a love
relationship between the victim and the present appellant, and out
of that love relationship, there was a physical relationship. Now the
investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed, further
incarceration of the present appellant is not required. In view of
that, he be released on bail.
6. Learned APP and learned appointed Counsel for the
respondent No.2 strongly opposed the said application on the
ground that the victim is only 14 years and 6 months of age, her
consent is not relevant. The prima facie case is made out against
the present appellant, as he has subjected her for forceful sexual
assault by threatening her. The apprehension was raised that if he
is released on bail, he would tamper with the prosecution evidence.
In view of that, the order passed by the learned Special Court
deserves to be maintained.
7. After hearing the learned Counsel for the appellant and
learned APP for the State and learned appointed Counsel for the
respondent No.2, perused the investigation papers from which it
reveals that there was an acquaintance between the victim and the
61.apeal.375.2024.Judgment.odt
present appellant. They were communicating with each other which
resulted into their love relationship. From her statement, it reveals
that initially, the mobile phone which was given by the present
appellant was snatched by her parents, but again she was provided
with the mobile phone by the present appellant and she was
communicating with him. Though she travelled along with him at
various places, she has not made any complaint about using some
force by the present appellant. Thus, it is apparent that out of the
love affairs, she joined the company of the present appellant. There
is no dispute as to the fact that the consent of the victim is not
relevant, but considering that out of a love affair, she went along
with him and stayed with him. Though she travelled by the public
transport, she has not made a complaint about any threatening by
the present appellant or subjecting her for sexual assault. It seems
that the alleged incident of sexual relationship is out of the
attraction between the two youngsters and it is not the case that
appellant has subjected the victim for sexual assault out of lust.
Considering the fact that though charge-sheet is filed and the trial
would take its own time for its final disposal. Considering the fact
that the circumstances under which the alleged incident took place,
further incarceration of the present appellant is not required and no
purpose will be served by keeping him behind bar. In view of that,
the application deserves to be allowed by imposing certain
conditions. Accordingly, I proceed to pass following order:
61.apeal.375.2024.Judgment.odt
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed.
(ii) The order passed by the learned Special Court in
Criminal Bail Application No.68/2024 rejecting the
application, is hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) The appellant Gopal Manohar Wankhede shall
be released on bail on executing PR Bond of
Rs.25,000/- with one solvent surety in the like amount
in connection with Crime No.193/2024 registered with
Police Station, Manora, District Washim for the offence
punishable under Sections 376(2)(n)(i), 363, 506 of
the Indian Penal Code, under Sections 3(1)(w)(i)(ii),
3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 4 of
the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.
(iv) The appellant shall not enter into the vicinity of
Madina Nagar, Manora, Taluka Manora, District Washim,
till culmination of the trial.
(v) The appellant shall furnish his address of
residence after releasing him on bail and shall furnish
the names of his two relatives and their addresses
before the trial Court.
(vi) The appellant shall not induce, threat or promise
any witnesses either physically or by electronic media
who are acquainted with facts of the present case.
8. The fees of the appointed Counsel for respondent No.2 be
quantified as per rules.
(URMIL A JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)
Sarkate.
Signed by: Mr. A.R. Sarkate
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 11/10/2024 17:51:18
