Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sanjay Vs. State of Maharashtra

Sanjay vs State of Maharashtra

Type Court Judgment Court Mumbai Aurangabad Decided Apr 04, 2016
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1184809

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Mumbai Aurangabad High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Application No. 1672 of 2016
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act Section 3(A), Section 3, Section 4 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 376, Section 504, Section 506 - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 439 Belated FIR- Applicant/Accused was working as government teacher along with mother of minor victim Applicant was alleg...

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sanjay

Respondent

State of Maharashtra

Excerpt

protection of children from sexual offences act section 3(a), section 3, section 4 - indian penal code, 1860 section 376, section 504, section 506 - criminal procedure code,1973 - section 439 belated fir- applicant/accused was working as government teacher along with mother of minor victim applicant was alleged to have committed forcible sexual intercourse with minor victim and threatened her not to disclose said incident police complaint was lodged belatedly and applicant was arrested applicant aggrieved over said fir, contended that due to disruption in relations, false complaint have been lodged after dozen days of alleged incident and medical evidence would not corroborate victim s version hence this bail application court held as fir was filed after delay of dozen days of alleged incident, medical evidence would not be either way helpful as applicant was in permanent government job as primary teacher, he would be available for trial while trial would take its own time, applicant can be released on conditional bail directions were issued to applicant not to enter prescribed area were minor victim resides till conclusion of trial and applicant shall not in any manner attempt to influence any prosecution witness applicant was to be released on bail on execution of bail bond for prescribed sum and upon furnishing surety for like amount application was disposed. paras: (6) .....the medical evidence would not corroborate the victim's version and, therefore, the applicant be released on bail. 5. learned a.p.p. however opposed the application. he submits that the present applicant, who is above 45 years old, has sexually assaulted a 15 years and 10 months old girl, who and whose mother had reposed trust on the applicant. merely because the fir is belated, the applicant cannot be released on bail. 6. upon hearing both sides and finding that since the fir was filed 12 days after the incidents, the medical evidence would not be either way helpful. in view of the fact that the present applicant is in permanent government job being a primary teacher, would be available for the trial and since the trial would take its own time, in my view, the applicant can very well be released on bail on certain conditions. 7. hence, the following order:- i) the application is allowed. ii) the applicant be released on bail in crime no.3 of 2016 registered with upanagar police station, dist. nandurbar for the offences punishable under section 376, 504, 506 of the indian penal code and under section 3(a), 4 of the protection of children from sexual offences act, upon his executing p.r. bond in the sum of rs.15,000/- (rs. fifteen thousand) and also upon furnishing surety in the like amount. iii) the applicant shall not enter the territorial limits of nandurbar city area till the trial is concluded except on the date/s of the hearing of the trial in the present case. iv) the applicant shall not in any way attempt to influence any of the prosecution witnesses in any manner. 8. application stands disposed of accordingly.

Full Judgment

Oral Order:

1. Heard both sides.

2. The present applicant, who is arrested by Upanagar Police Station, District Nandurbar in Crime No.3 of 2016 for the offences punishable under section 376, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3(A), 3, 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, is praying for his release on bail.

3. Submissions from both sides would show that the present applicant is serving as a Primary Teacher at Lonkheda, Tq. Shahada, Dist. Nandurabar. The present applicant was the friend of the mother of 15 years and 10 months old victim. According to the victim, on 26/12/2015, in the night, the present applicant had been to her house and the house of her widowed mother at Nandurbar, since her mother wanted to purchase a house at Nandurbar on the advice of the present applicant. In the night of 26/12/2015, however, he committed forcible sexual intercourse in the house and in the morning of 27/12/2015 at 8.00 am, he again had sexual intercourse with the victim. Thereafter, he threatened her (victim) not to narrate the incidents to her mother otherwise her mother also would not be spared. In the circumstances, though the incidents have occurred on 26/12/2015 and 27/12/2015, the FIR came to be filed on 09/01/2016.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that only due to the disruption in the relations, a false complaint after 12 days of the alleged incidents came to be filed. He submits that the applicant is a primary teacher while mother of the victim is serving as a nurse in the primary health center. He submits that the applicant was arrested on 10/01/2016. Chargesheet is now filed. The medical evidence would not corroborate the victim's version and, therefore, the applicant be released on bail.

5. Learned A.P.P. however opposed the application. He submits that the present applicant, who is above 45 years old, has sexually assaulted a 15 years and 10 months old girl, who and whose mother had reposed trust on the applicant. Merely because the FIR is belated, the applicant cannot be released on bail.

6. Upon hearing both sides and finding that since the FIR was filed 12 days after the incidents, the medical evidence would not be either way helpful. In view of the fact that the present applicant is in permanent government job being a primary teacher, would be available for the trial and since the trial would take its own time, in my view, the applicant can very well be released on bail on certain conditions.

7. Hence, the following order:-

I) The Application is allowed.

II) The applicant be released on bail in Crime No.3 of 2016 registered with Upanagar Police Station, Dist. Nandurbar for the offences punishable under section 376, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3(A), 4 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, upon his executing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) and also upon furnishing surety in the like amount.

III) The applicant shall not enter the territorial limits of Nandurbar city area till the trial is concluded except on the date/s of the hearing of the trial in the present case.

IV) The applicant shall not in any way attempt to influence any of the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

8. Application stands disposed of accordingly.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial