← Library
Bombay High CourtBA/100/2019bail rejected

Ujwala Ravindra Atkare v. The State Of Maharashtra

2019-02-08Hon'Ble Shri Justice Nitin W. Sambre2 pages

1 902) ba100-19.doc SAS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.100 OF 2019 Ujwala Ravindra Atkare ..Applicant.

V/s.

The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent.

Mr.Satyavrat Joshi for the applicant.

Ms.S.S.Kaushik, APP for the respondent-State. CORAM : NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.

DATE : FEBRUARY 8, 2019 P.C.:- Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.

2.

The applicant after her arrest on August 31, 2018 came to be charge-sheeted in crime No.321/2018 for offence punishable under sections 363, 366(A), 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered with Dattawadi police station, Pune, 3.

The allegations against the applicant are of taking the victim minor girl in the crime in question on the pretext of providing a mobile to various places and made her to have intercourse with coaccused.

2 902) ba100-19.doc 4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the investigation in the matter is complete and charge-sheet is already filed. There are no criminal antecedents. Considering the age of the applicant and nature of evidence available on record, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.

5.

Per contra, learned APP submits that there is sufficient material to infer involvement of the applicant in the crime in question.

6.

Having perused the medical evidence and other investigation papers, it can be inferred from the record about strong evidence available against the applicant which connects the applicant to the crime in question. The victim girl has in categorical terms narrated her plight in the complaint and supplementary statement as to how the applicant played active role in the commission of a serious crime, to infer involvement of the applicant in the crime in question.

7.

Taking into consideration the strong evidence available against the applicant, I hardly notice any merit to grant bail to the applicant. The application is rejected.

(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)