SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Bom) 1110

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
Vinay Joshi, Valmiki Sa Menezes, JJ.
Govind & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 679 of 2022
Decided On : 03-01-2023

Advocates appeared:
S. V. Sirpurkar, Advocate, N. S. Rao, Advocate, N. G. Chaubey, Advocate

The exercise of judicial discretion in granting bail is based on the credibility of the allegations and the absence of misuse of interim protection, despite the completion of police investigation.

Headnote:

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - Bail - Improbable Story of Victim - Exercise of Judicial Discretion

Fact of the Case:

The appeal challenged the rejection of regular bail for the accused under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in connection with offenses under the Indian Penal Code and the SC and ST Act. The victim alleged sexual abuse and physical advances by the accused while residing in their rented premises.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the victim's story to be improbable and noted discrepancies in the timeline of events. It exercised judicial discretion to release the accused on bail, considering the completion of police investigation and the absence of misuse of interim protection granted earlier.

Issues: The issues involved the credibility of the victim's allegations, the timeline of events, and the exercise of judicial discretion in granting bail.

Ratio Decidendi: The court exercised its judicial discretion to grant bail to the accused based on the improbability of the victim's story and the absence of misuse of interim protection, despite the completion of police investigation.

Final Decision: The impugned order rejecting regular bail was quashed, and the accused were granted bail with the condition not to tamper with or contact prosecution witnesses.

JUDGMENT

Vinay Joshi, J. - Heard.

2. By consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, Criminal Appeal is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.

ADMIT.

3. This is an appeal under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, 'SC and ST Act') challenging the order of rejection of regular bail passed in Special Case No.67 of 2022 vide order dated 15.09.2022. Both the Appellants were arrested by the Police of Shegaon Police Station, District Buldana in connection with the offence punishable under Sections 376, 324, 354, 354A(1)(i) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2), 3(V) and 3(2)(va) of the SC and ST Act.

4. At the instance of report lodged by Victim a married lady aged 21 years, crime has been registered. It is her contention that on 26.03.2022, she alongwith her husband started to reside in the rented premises owned by both the Appellants-accused. Victim's husband used to go out for labour work and in his absence, both the accused were entering in her room and making physical advances. Both of them have also sexually abused her on threat of dire consequences. The Victim has not disclosed the things to her husband out of fear. After three months, they left the tenanted room, shifted elsewhere, and thereafter, she has lodged report.

5. Shri Sirpurkar, learned Counsel appearing for Appellants-accused would submit that the story as narrated by Victim is totally improbable. The Victim is major and her non-disclosure of alleged incident to her husband is also improbable. It is Appellants' contention that the Victim and her husband have avoided to pay the rent and when it was demanded, they have been falsely implicated. As per Police report, the alleged incident took place somewhere in the first and second week of April-2022, whilst the Police report has been lodged after three months. The Victim though was staying with her husband, she has not disclosed the things to her husband, but continued to stay in said room for next three months, which prima facie, appears to be doubtful. Already Police have completed investigation and charge-sheet has been filed. By the time the Victim has left to reside at Shegaon and staying elsewhere. This Court has already granted interim protection prior to two months, but there is no complaint of misuse of liberty. Having regard to all above facts, it is a fit case to exercise our judicial discretion in releasing accused on bail.

6. In view of above, criminal appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 15.09.2022 passed by Special Judge, Khamgaon, Dist. Buldana in Special Case No.67 of 2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. Interim order passed by this Court on 21.10.2022 is hereby made absolute with further condition that the Appellants shall not tamper or contact the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

7. Criminal appeal stands disposed of in above terms. Criminal applications, if any, stand disposed of.

8. Fees of appointed Counsel be paid as per Rule.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top