Bombay High Court
Dinesh Fakira Mohurle vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Pso Ner ... on 22 October, 2024
2024:BHC-NAG:12087
48.apeal.605.2024.Judgment.odt
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.605 OF 2024
Dinesh Fakira Mohurle,
Age 30 Years, Occupation: Labour,
R/o. Mangaladevi,
Taluka Ner, District Yavatmal. ..... APPELLANT
// VERSUS //
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Ner, Taluka Ner,
District Yavatmal.
2. XYZ
Victim in crime No.857/023,
Police Station, Ner,
Taluka Ner, District Yavatmal. .... RESPONDENTS
----------------------------------------
Mr. Latif Mirza, Counsel for the appellant.
Mr. S. V. Narale, APP for respondent No.1/State.
Ms. Jayanti A. Deshpande, appointed Counsel for
respondent No.2.
----------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED : 22.10.2024
ORAL JUDGMENT :
Criminal Application (APPA) No.1060/2024
1. The application is for condonation of delay.
2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that
initially, he has filed the application inadvertently, and therefore, the
delay of 180 days was caused to file this appeal.
48.apeal.605.2024.Judgment.odt
3. Considering the reasons mentioned in the application,
the delay is condoned.
4. The application is disposed of.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.605 OF 2024
1. Admit.
2. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel
appearing for the parties.
3. By this appeal, the appellant has challenged the order
passed by the learned Special Judge and Additional Sessions Judge,
Yavatmal, by which the application of the present appellant for grant
of bail is rejected.
4. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant who submitted
that the crime is registered on the basis of report lodged by the
father of the victim girl on an allegation that his daughter aged
about 17 years was studying in 11 th Standard. On 30.10.2023, on
the pretext of attending the college, she left the house and not
returned back. Thereafter, he searched, but he could not trace her.
On inquiry with his niece, it revealed to him that she was
communicating with the present appellant and present appellant
has taken her at Surat. Therefore, he approached the Police Station
48.apeal.605.2024.Judgment.odt
and lodged the report. During the investigation, the victim was
traced as she was found along with the present appellant. Her
statement was recorded, and on the basis of the statement, it
reveals that the present appellant on the promise of marriage took
her along with him and subjected her for forceful sexual assault.
On the basis of the said, the crime was registered under Section
376 of the Indian Penal Code.
5. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that
appellant and the victim both got acquaintance through Instagram
which resulted into their love affair and out of the love affair, there
was a physical relationship between them. But as the victim was
found along with the present appellant, due to the pressure of her
parents, she gave a false statement. He relied upon the
photographs which shows that the victim was staying along with the
appellant happily and there was no displeasure shown by her. Thus,
considering the same, the investigation is completed and charge-
sheet is already 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 - victim strongly opposed the said application and
submitted that the consent of the victim is not relevant, forcefully
victim was taken by the present appellant and subjected her for the
forceful sexual assault. Considering the manner in which the
48.apeal.605.2024.Judgment.odt
alleged incident has taken place, the application for grant of bail
deserves to be rejected.
7. After hearing the learned Counsel for the appellant,
learned APP for the State and learned appointed Counsel for the
non-applicant No.2 - victim, perused the entire investigation papers,
from which it reveals that the victim and the appellant got
acquaintance with each other through Instagram. They have
exchanged various messages, WhatsApp as well as Instagram
messages, from which it reveals that there was a love affair
between them. Photographs on record also sufficiently shows that
victim was staying along with him happily and no displeasure
appears to be there from the photographs. The statement of the
victim shows that there was a love affair between them. Thus,
considering the said statement it reveals that out of a love affair
and attraction towards each other two young persons came together
and a physical relationship was developed between them.
Considering the statement of the victim girl and considering the fact
that now the investigation is completed, charge-sheet is filed,
further incarceration of the present appellant is not required, the
appeal deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, I proceed to pass
following order:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed.
48.apeal.605.2024.Judgment.odt
(ii) The order passed by the Special Judge in Criminal
Bail Application No.542/2023 rejecting the bail application
is hereby quashed and set aside.
(iii) The appellant Dinesh Fakira Mohurle shall be
released on bail in connection with Crime No.857/2023
registered with Police Station Ner, District Yavatmal for the
offences punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(n) of
the Indian Penal Code, under Sections 4 and 6 of the
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and
under Section 3(2)(v), 3(1)(w)(i)(ii) of the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989, on executing PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one
solvent surety in the like amount.
(iv) The appellant shall not enter into the vicinity of
village Pimpri Mukhatyarpur, Taluka Ner, District Yavatmal,
till culmination of the trial.
(v) The appellant shall not induce, threat or promise any
witnesses who are acquainted with the facts of the case.
(vi) The appellant shall attend the proceeding before the
Special Court without seeking any exemption unless there
are exceptional circumstances.
8. The fees of the appointed Counsel be quantified as per Rules.
9. The appeal is disposed of.
(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)
Signed by: Mr. A.R. Sarkate
Sarkate.
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 25/10/2024 11:22:59
