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

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - BENCH AT NAGPUR
JAMNALAL S/O DEVILAL GADWAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. PSO PS IMAMWADA, DIST. NAGPUR AND ANOTHER – Respondent
APEAL 43/2021



Advocates:
['PRAKASH S JAISWAL', '', 'ASHISH ISHWARLAL NAYAK', 'R R SHARMA', 'SUKRUT S SOHONI', 'ABHIMANYU R SAMARTH']

1/4

APEAL-43.21.odt-Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 43 OF 2021

APPELLANT :-

Jamnalal S/o Devilal Gadwal, Aged 54

years, Occ. Private, R/o. Rani Society,

Pardi Ekta Nagar, Nagpur.

...VERSUS...

RESPONDENTS :-

1.State of Maharashtra, Through P.S.O. PS

Imamwada, Dist. Nagpur.

2.Usha Sunil Sahare, Aged 48 Years, Occ.

Housewife, R/o, Pachnal Chowk, Police

Station Imamwada, Nagpur.

3.Nikita Sonu Moon, Aged : 28 Years, Occ:

Housewife, R/o: Rented in House

Bhushan, Ashok Chowk, Behind NIT

Garden, Sirespeth, Nagpur.

(Victim) (Given as per page No.22)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. S. S. Sohoni, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. T.A.Mirza, A.P.P. for respondent No.1.

None for respondent Nos.2 and 3.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM : Z.A.HAQ AND AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED : 27.04.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Amit B. Borkar, J.)

1.

Heard.

2.

ADMIT.

KHUNTE

2/4

APEAL-43.21.odt-Judgment

3.

This is an appeal under section 14-A of the Scheduled

Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

challenging order dated 16/12/2020 passed by the Additional Sessions

Judge-11, Nagpur in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.3390 of

2020 below Exhibit-1 in connection with Crime No.359 of 2020

registered with respondent No.1-Police Station for offences punishable

under sections 376, 370, 366 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal

Code and section 3(1)(w) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “SC ST

Act”).

4.

The First Information Report came to be registered against

the appellant and others with accusations that daughter of the

complainant (victim) had called the complainant and told that the

appellant persuaded victim to accompany her at Rajasthan and sold

victim for an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- to a person in Rajasthan and

performed marriage with him. The said fact was informed to the

complainant by the victim by making telephone call.

5.

The appellant, therefore, filed an application under section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking pre-arrest bail in relation

to Crime No.359 of 2020 with Additional Sessions Judge-11, Nagpur.

The learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order rejected application

of the appellant under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

KHUNTE

3/4

APEAL-43.21.odt-Judgment

The appellant has therefore, filed present appeal under section 14-A of

the SC ST Act.

6.

This Court, on 21/01/2021 issued notice to the

respondents.

7.

We have heard learned Advocate for the appellant. It is

submitted that the victim is major and was having knowledge about the

acts done by her at Rajasthan. It is submitted that investigation is

complete and custodial interrogation is not necessary. Learned APP

submitted that the appellant is habitual offender and offence punishable

under sections 376, 366-A, 370, 370-A of the Indian Penal Code and

under the provisions of POCSO Act is pending against the appellant.

The appellant is released on bail in the said offence. It is submitted that

there is likelihood of tampering of evidence if the appellant is protected.

8.

We have carefully considered the allegations in the First

Information Report. The learned APP has placed on record case diary.

We have also carefully considered the case diary. The case diary reflects

statements of victim and other witnesses. From the case diary, it

appears that there is prima facie material available against the

appellant. The appellant has criminal antecedents to his discredit for

the offences punishable under sections 376, 366-A, 370, 370-A of the

Indian Penal Code and under the provisions of POCSO Act. The

KHUNTE

4/4

APEAL-43.21.odt-Judgment

allegation against the appellant is of immoral trafficking.

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