8-apeal-955-2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 955 OF 2021

Karan Shivaji Walunj

...Appellant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

...Respondents

……

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi i/b. Mr.Nitesh Mohite for the Appellant.

Mr. V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, APP for the Respondent -State.

Ms. Gauri Velankar for Respondent No.2.

…...

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &

V.G.BISHT, JJ.

DATE :

13TH JUNE, 2022

P.C.:

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

By this appeal, the appellant seeks his enlargement on bail in

connection with C.R. No. 578 of 2020, registered with the Junnar Police

Station, District – Pune, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections

376 (D) and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (‘I.P.C.’); under

Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences

Act,2012 (‘P.O.C.S.O.’); and under Sections 3 (2) (v), 3 (2) (va), 3 (1) (w)

(i) (ii) and 6 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of

Atrocities) Act (‘SCST Act’).

Trupti

1/3

TRUPTI

SADANAND

BAMNE

Digitally signed by

TRUPTI SADANAND

BAMNE

Date: 2022.06.14

14:38:46 +0530

8-apeal-955-2021.doc

3.

Perused the papers, in particularly, the statement of the prosecutrix,

aged 17 years 2 months. The prosecutrix in her statement dated 29^th

December, 2020 has stated that the incident had taken place on 20^th

December, 2020 at about 11.30 a.m., when she and her sister had gone to

the tailor’s shop. She has stated that while they were returning home, the

appellant alongwith another co-accused were following them and when

they reached near the Mahar Maal, co-accused No.1 Saurav caught hold of

the prosecutrix’s hand and dragged her in the jawar field; that the appellant

and co-accused No.1 Saurav undressed her and committed rape on her one

after another; and that co-accused No.3 Aditya took her nude photographs

in his mobile. She has stated that because of the threats given by the

accused, she did not disclose the said incident to anyone, on going home.

4.

The prosecutrix has further stated that she disclosed the incident to

her mother on 28^th December, 2020, pursuant to which the complaint was

lodged. Pursuant to FIR, the prosecutrix was sent for her medical

examination. The history given by the prosecutrix and her mother to the

Doctor, is consistent with the contents of the FIR. The medical case papers

also show that the prosecutrix was sexually assaulted.

5.

Considering the aforesaid, this is not a fit case to grant bail to the

appellant. Hence, the appeal is rejected.

Trupti

2/3

8-apeal-955-2021.doc

6.

Needless to say, the observations made herein are prima facie, for

the purpose of deciding this appeal and the trial Court shall decide the case

on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the

observations made in this order.

V.G.BISHT, J.

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

Trupti

3/3