Bombay High Court
Aryan / Luckky Kamlesh Lavankar ( In ... vs State Of Maha Thr Pso, Ps Pachpaoli, ... on 23 June, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:5991
1 64apeal128.2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 128 OF 2025
APPELLANT Aryan @ Lucky Kamlesh Lavankar (In Jail)
Aged about 19 years, Occu: Student,
R/o Barse Nagar, Near Darga, Nagpur.
-VERSUS-
RESPONDENTS 1. State of Maharashtra, through
Police Station Officer, Police Station,
Pachpaoli, Nagpur.
2. ABC (Minor Victim),
Aged about 47, Occu: Labour,
through Police Station Officer, Police
Station, Pachpaoli, Nagpur.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. P.S. Jaiswal, counsel for appellant.
Mr. Amit Madiwale, APP for respondent/State.
Ms. Varsha Warade, counsel (appointed) for respondent No.2.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATE : 23/06/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Heard.
2. Admit. Heard finally with the consent of learned
rkn
2 64apeal128.2025.odt
counsels appearing for the parties.
3. By preferring this appeal, the appellant has
challenged the order passed below Exhibit-11 in Special Case No.
497/2024, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-14 and Special
Judge under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Nagpur, by which the application of
the present appellant for grant of bail was rejected.
4. The appellant is arraigned as an accused in
connection with Crime No. 516/2024, registered with Police
Station Pachpaoli, Nagpur, for the offences punishable under
sections 376, 376(A & B), 376(2)(j), and 376(3) of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ' IPC ' for short); and
Sections 4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ' POCSO Act' for
short); and Sections 3(1)(w) (i)(ii), 3(2)(v) and 3(2)(va) of the
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ' SC/ST Act ' for short).
5. The crime is registered on the basis of a report lodged
by grandmother of the victim girl, on an allegation that her
granddaughter, who is aged about 9 years, was subjected for
rkn
3 64apeal128.2025.odt
sexual harassment by the present appellant by touching to her
private part. On the basis of the said report, police have registered
the crime against the present appellant. The present appellant was
arrested on 04/06/2024, since then, he has been behind bar.
6. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, who
submitted that as far as the allegations are concerned, which are
levelled out of the previous dispute. Now, the investigation is
already completed, and the charge sheet is already filed. He
invited my attention towards the statement of victim girl and
submitted that the statement of victim girl nowhere reveals that
she was subjected for penetrative sexual assault. At the most, the
offence under Section 8 of the SC/ST Act is made out. Now, the
investigation is already completed and the charge-sheet is already
filed, and the alleged offence is punishable with imprisonment up
to five years. Considering all these aspects, appellant be released
on bail.
7. Learned APP and learned counsel for the respondent
No.2/victim strongly opposed the said application on the ground
that 9 years girl was subjected for sexual harassment by the
present appellant. The statement of the victim and her
rkn
4 64apeal128.2025.odt
grandmother substantiates the contention. In view of that, the
order passed by the learned Special Court deserves to be
maintained, and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.
8. On hearing both sides and on perusal of the
investigation papers, it reveals that, as per the allegations, the
present appellant is residing in the neighborhood of the informant,
allegedly called the victim girl and subjected her for forceful sexual
assault by touching her private part. The statement of the victim is
also recorded, and she has also narrated the similar facts. As far as
the penetrative sexual assault is concerned, there is no allegation
to that effect. The allegation is only to the extent of touching to
her private part.
9. Moreover, the allegations levelled against the present
appellant, for which the punishment upto five years is provided.
The investigation has already been completed and charge-sheet
has been filed. However, considering the nature of the allegations,
some conditions required to be imposed. In view of that, I proceed
to pass the following order.
a] Criminal appeal is allowed.
rkn
5 64apeal128.2025.odt
b] The order passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-14 and Special Judge under Scheduled Caste
and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
Nagpur, rejecting the bail application below Exhibit-11
is hereby quashed and set aside.
c] The appellant - Aryan @ Lucky Kamlesh Lavankar
shall be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond of
Rs. 25,000/- with one solvent surety in the like
amount.
d] The appellant shall not enter into the vicinity of Barse
Nagar in the jurisdiction of Police Station Pachpaoli,
till culmination of the trial.
e] The appellant shall attend the proceedings before the
Special Court without seeking any exemption unless
there are exceptional circumstances.
f] The appellant shall not induce, threat or promise any
witnesses who are acquainted with the facts of the
present case either physically or through electronic
media.
rkn
6 64apeal128.2025.odt
g] The fees of the appointed counsel be quantified as per
Rule.
Criminal appeal is disposed of accordingly.
[URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.]
rkn
