Prafull Yuvraj Veer v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.738 OF 2015 Prafull Yuvraj Veer ....Applicant.

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent.

Mr. Ritesh Ratnam , advocate for the Applicant. Mr. S.S.Pednekar, APP for the respondent-State. IO Mr. Vilas Bhosale, Dy.S.P. Khed Division, Ratnagiri present. CORAM : MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

DATED : April 10, 2015.

P.C.:

The application is moved for bail as the applicant­accused is facing charges under Sections 363, 366, 384,353, 354, 323, 325, 500 and 506 read with Sections 3(1)

(11) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 .

It is the case of the informant that she was holding good post in the Government. She started chatting with the applicant-accused on facebook. However, the applicant-accused disclosed that he was in love with her and started harassing her. He started demanding money from her and, therefore, she paid him Rs.4,46,000/-. On 7.2.2015, he arrived in her Shivgan 1/3

office. He broke glass on her table and forcibly took her out of the office in presence of her colleagues. He put her in the car and from Dapoli he brought her to Pune. She tried to escape but she could not. Then he stated that he wanted to take treatment of psychiatrist at Pune. Therefore, both of them were went to some clinic and then counselling was over. She contacted her maternal uncle. Her mother arrived and then FIR was given. Applicant-accused was arrested on 7.2.2015. Hence, this bail application. The learned counsel for the applicant-accused prays for bail as he is innocent and not committed any offence as alleged.

The learned prosecutor produced statements of the witnesses and also produced transcript of the telephonic conversation took between the complainant and the applicant-accused in which he has demanded money even to the tune of Rs.20 crores. The learned prosecutor submitted that the offence under the SCST Act is registered against the applicant-accused. He is not to be released on bail. Perused the FIR, supplementary statement of the complainant, recorded conversation between the complainant and the applicantaccused. It appears prima-facie that the facts of the case are different than what they are stated by the complainant. The incident of kidnapping and payment of money immediately thereafter appear to be changed.

statement. Prima-facie it appears to be after thought. In view of this and as the applicant-accused is behind the bar since 7.2.2015, bail is granted to the applicant-accused.

i) The applicant/accused shall be released on bail upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/­, with one or two sureties in the like amount;

ii) The applicant­accused shall not contact the complainant. ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence; iii) The applicant shall not indulge into any kind of offence while on bail;

(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) Shivgan 3/3