Bombay High CourtAPEAL/575/2017appeal dismissed

Ashok Baburao Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra

2017-07-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sandeep Kashinath Shinde,Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.K. Tahilramani4 pages

* 1/4 * 15-APEAL-575-2017.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.575 OF 2017 Ashok Baburao Patil ......Appellant V/s.

State of Maharashtra .......Respondent Mr. Rahul S. Kate, Advocate for Appellant.

Mr. H.J.Dedhia, APP for Respondent-State.

Mr. Mahindra B. Deshmukh, Advocate for applicant in Application No.981 of 2017.

CORAM :

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, & SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

DATE :

July 19, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT : [ Per Smt. V.K.Tahilramani, J.] ORAL JUDGMENT : [ Per Smt. V.K.Tahilramani, J.] Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned counsel for the complainant and the learned APP learned counsel for the complainant and the learned APP for the State.

for the State.

This appeal has been preferred against the order This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 3.7.2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karad dated 3.7.2017 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karad in Criminal Miscellaneous (Bail) Application No.106 of 2017 in Criminal Miscellaneous (Bail) Application No.106 of 2017 preferred by the appellant wherein he has sought anticipatory preferred by the appellant wherein he has sought anticipatory

* 2/4 * 15-APEAL-575-2017.doc bail in C.R.No.147 of 2017 registered at Koregaon Police Station bail in C.R.No.147 of 2017 registered at Koregaon Police Station for offence punishable under Sections 376, 417, 406, 420, 323, for offence punishable under Sections 376, 417, 406, 420, 323, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Sections 8 and 10 of Protection of Civil Act, 1989 and under Sections 8 and 10 of Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. By the order dated 3.7.2017, Application Rights Act, 1955. By the order dated 3.7.2017, Application No.106 of 2017 preferred by the appellant seeking anticipatory No.

106 of 2017 preferred by the appellant seeking anticipatory bail came to be rejected. It is stated that the said C.R. has now bail came to be rejected. It is stated that the said C.R. has now been transferred to Karad City Police Station and it has been been transferred to Karad City Police Station and it has been numbered as 363 of 2017.

numbered as 363 of 2017.

The complainant is a married lady. She has The complainant is a married lady. She has specifically stated in her FIR that the appellant promised to specifically stated in her FIR that the appellant promised to marry her and had sexual relations with her from time to time. marry her and had sexual relations with her from time to time. She has stated that on 8.5.2017 when she asked the appellant She has stated that on 8.5.2017 when she asked the appellant when he would marry her, the appellant abused her in relation when he would marry her, the appellant abused her in relation to her caste and had forcible sexual intercourse with her. It is to her caste and had forcible sexual intercourse with her.

It is further the case of the complainant that the appellant took an further the case of the complainant that the appellant took an amount of Rs.3,86,000/- from her as well as two gold rings. amount of Rs.3,86,000/- from her as well as two gold rings. However, he avoided to return the amount taken from her. However, he avoided to return the amount taken from her.

* 3/4 * 15-APEAL-575-2017.doc grant anticipatory bail.

grant anticipatory bail.

The Appeal is dismissed.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellant At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellant states that interim protection may be extended as they wish to states that interim protection may be extended as they wish to approach the Apex Court. In view of the prayer made, interim approach the Apex Court. In view of the prayer made, interim protection is extended till 8.8.2017.

protection is extended till 8.8.2017.

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J) (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J)

* 4/4 * 15-APEAL-575-2017.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.981 OF 2017 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.575 OF 2017 Madhuri Prakash Sontakke ......Applicant

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

Ashok Baburao Patil ......Appellant V/s.

State of Maharashtra .......Respondent Mr. Mahindra B. Deshmukh, Advocate for Applicant. Mr. Rahul S. Kate, Advocate for Appellant.

Mr. H.J.Dedhia, APP for Respondent-State.

CORAM :

CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, & SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.

DATE :

July 19, 2017.

P.C:

In view of the averments made in the In view of the averments made in the application, the application is allowed and the intervenor application, the application is allowed and the intervenor (Complainant) is allowed to intervene in the Criminal (Complainant) is allowed to intervene in the Criminal Appeal No.575 of 2017.

Appeal No.575 of 2017.

The application stands disposed of accordingly. The application stands disposed of accordingly. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J) (SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J)