Sorry, no records were found. Please adjust your search criteria and try again.
Sorry, unable to load the Maps API.
Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1119 OF 2015 Shri Rohit Jaywant Mane Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil for the Applicant. Mr. Arfan Sait, A.P.P. for Respondent - State. Mr. M.V. Damase, HC/1797, Tasgaon Police Station, Dist. Sangli, present. CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. DATED : JULY 31, 2015 P.C. :- 1 The application is moved for bail as the applicant/accused is facing charges for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2), (F), (I), (N), 366, 452, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5,(L), 6, & 8 of POCSO Act in C.R. No.255 of 2014 registered with Tasgaon Police Station, District Sangli. 2 It is the case of the prosecution that applicant/accused is paternal uncle of the prosecutrix, who is 16 years and 11 months old and school going girl. That on 9.10.2014 applicant/accused who is 27 years old, took her out culvert near a temple and raped her. Thereafter again on 3.11.2014 when she was alone in the house he raped her. He was arrested on 4.11.2014. Hence, this bail application. 3 Learned Counsel for the applicant/accused submitted that there is a discrepancy of her statement before the Medical officer and her statement recorded by the police. In the statement before the Medical officer, she did not say of the second incident of rape but she mentioned that attempt to rape on 3.11.2014. However, in the statement recorded by the police she had stated that second time also he has raped. The learned counsel submitted that it appears that she has given different versions and, therefore, benefit is to be given to the applicant/accused by releasing him on bail. 4 The learned prosecutor opposed the application. He relied on the medical certificate and her statement recorded before the police and the statement of her father. He submitted that prosecutrix was minor i.e. below 16 years old. 5 Perused all the papers, medical certificate in favour of case of the prosecutrix. Considering the contents in the F.I.R. and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded by the police, it is prima facie a case of rape. The applicant/accused is paternal uncle of the prosecutrix and prosecutrix is minor. In view of this it is not a case to grant bail. 6 The Bail Application is rejected. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.)
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Rohit Jaywant Mane
Order - Status 7: 1 1p.aba173.143.15.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 173 OF 2015 Shekhar Bhagwanrao Gore .....Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra .....Respondent WITH CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 143 OF 2015 Arvind Gyanchand Bansal and another ….Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra ….Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 129 OF 2015 IN CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 143 OF 2015 Sandeep Ghadge Intervener IN THE MATTER BETWEEN Arvind Gyanchand Bansal and another Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra Respondent WITH CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 144 OF 2015 Rakesh Tikaram Vishwakarma and another ….Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra ….Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 128 OF 2015 IN Talwalkar 1/3 2 1p.aba173.143.15.sxw CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 144 OF 2015 Sandeep Ghadge Intervener IN THE MATTER BETWEEN Rakesh Tikaram Vishwakarma and another Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra Respondent WITH CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 145 OF 2015 A. Parthiban and another ….Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra ….Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 130 OF 2015 IN CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 145 OF 2015 Sandeep Ghadge Intervener IN THE MATTER BETWEEN A. Parthiban and another Applicants V/s The State of Maharashtra Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 41 OF 2016 IN CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 143 OF 2015 Smt. Shubhangi Sandip Yadav. ….Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra. ….Respondent. ….. Talwalkar 2/3 Mr. Prashant Patil, advocate for Applicant in ABA 173 of 2015. Ms. Veera Shinde APP for the State. Mr. Kuldeep S. Patil, advocate for applicant in APPP 41/16 in ABA 143/15. CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV,J DATE : SEPTEMBER 26, 2016 P.C.: 1 Not on board. Upon production taken on board. 2 This is for speaking to the minutes of the order dated 26/2/2015. In second line of paragraph5 of the order, the name "Sandeep mane" be read as "Sandip Uttam Yadav". Corrections be carried out accordingly. 3 In view of the above order correcting the order dated 26/2/2015, the Criminal Application No. 41 of 2016 is allowed and disposed of accordingly. (SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV,J) Talwalkar 3/3
Respondent-1: The State Of Maharashtra
Petitioner-1: Shubhangi Sandip Yadav