Sunday, 11 October 2020

Whether the court can release accused on bail if the complainant has failed to give material particulars about the incident in FIR?

  Perusal of the FIR would clearly reveal that there are no

details about any date and time of the incident. Vaguely the

incident is referred to have taken place in the month of

May/June, 2018, but without any specific date or time. The

complaint, which refers to four distinct occasions are again

without any date and time. Prima facie, the justification given

by the complainant, is a feeble attempt to explain the delay. The

complainant is a lady, aged 37 years. The applicant is aged 63

years. The allegations under the POCSO Act in respect of

the misbehaviour with the niece of the complainant also lack in

details about the date and time and is being reported after two

and half years.

6. The delay in lodging the complaint, at the time of trial may

not be considered as fatal and the prosecutrix may come up with

appropriate explanation at that time, but at present, proceeding

on the basis of the complaint and the version contained therein,

the custodial interrogation of the applicant, in my considered

opinion, is not necessary.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION (ST) NO.2676 OF 2020

Ezzakk Shashikumar Naik Vs The State of Maharashtra 

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE, J.

DATED : 7th OCTOBER, 2020


1. By the present application, the applicant seek his release in

anticipation of his arrest in connection with FIR lodged against

him with Rajgad Police Station, Taluka Bhor, District Pune vide

C.R.No.523 of 2020. The said C.R. invoke Sections 376 and

354 of IPC alongwith Section 12 of POCSO Act, 2012.

2. The applicant, a sexagenarian, is working with the

Vangelical Alliance Ministries Trust, Nashik, a Public Charitable

Trust. There is an existing dispute of the Trust with one expelled

trustee, who was charged with commission of fraud and illegal

activities and an restraint order has been passed against him in

the past. The submission of the applicant is, the present FIR is a

counter attack to the said action against him and the complainant

has been projected for levelling the allegations of rape against

the applicant. It would be therefore necessary to examine the

allegations in the complaint filed by the prosecutrix, based on

which the subject FIR has been registered.

3. The prosecutrix has lodged a complaint on 27th August,

2020 with Rajgad Police Station. The complaint is against one

person named Naik, without giving any other details. The

prosecutrix allege that she is resident of Mangewadi and is

residing with her minor daughter and sister at the given address.

She is engaged in petty house hold work in the adjoining area

and is residing separately from her husband for last five years.

She refers to an incident, which took place before two and half

years, in the month of May or June 2018, when she was in search

of work and she came to know that in a Girls' School in Khed

Shivapur, there was a need of a staff for cleaning purposes. She

approached the Mission School and there a man with mustache

was sitting. When she pleaded with him to engage her, he

informed her that there is no vacancy, but assured that since one

of the employee is likely to be ousted, she should come after 2-3

days. She then gathered that the name of the person to whom

she has spoken was Shri Naik. After two days, she again visited

Mission School and met Naik sir, who asked her to come after a

week. She again approached after a week and was informed that

there is no vacancy. The complainant alleged that though she

visited the school on 2-3 occasions in the month, she was not

offered any work. After some days, she again visited the school

and Mr.Naik offered her work and told her that she would get

20,000/- to 25,000/- for the said work, but she must act as per his

instructions. On this assurance, she went to the school and spoke

to Mr.Naik, who is reported to have stated that she will be given

work, but for that purpose, the complainant would have to

establish physical intimacy with him and she will have to be at

his beck and call. Thereafter, it is stated that he took her to one

room, which was located at the back side of the building and he

indulged into sexual intercourse. He thereafter said that he

would engage her and pay an amount of Rs.22,000/- to 25,000/-

since she had pleased him. She was asked to come back after

two-three days. The incident was repeated and the allegation is

that on the assurance that she would be offered some job,

Mr.Naik (the applicant) had compelled her to establish physical

relationship. One more time, the incident was repeated. Then,

she said that on one occasion, her sister's daughter Reshma aged

14 years had accompanied her to the school when she went to

meet the applicant and the minor girl complained to her that an

aged person whom she pointed out as Mr.Naik had hugged her.

4. The complaint also explained delay in lodging the

complaint and the prosecutrix has stated that she was helpless

and since Mr.Naik did not offer her job inspite of his assurance,

she approached a social worker and she showed her the way to

the police station and, therefore, she has reported the incident.


5. Perusal of the FIR would clearly reveal that there are no

details about any date and time of the incident. Vaguely the

incident is referred to have taken place in the month of

May/June, 2018, but without any specific date or time. The

complaint, which refers to four distinct occasions are again

without any date and time. Prima facie, the justification given

by the complainant, is a feeble attempt to explain the delay. The

complainant is a lady, aged 37 years. The applicant is aged 63

years. The allegations under the POCSO Act in respect of

the misbehaviour with the niece of the complainant also lack in

details about the date and time and is being reported after two

and half years.

6. The delay in lodging the complaint, at the time of trial may

not be considered as fatal and the prosecutrix may come up with

appropriate explanation at that time, but at present, proceeding

on the basis of the complaint and the version contained therein,

the custodial interrogation of the applicant, in my considered

opinion, is not necessary. The applicant is a responsible person

and is resident of the address given in the application and is

working with the Public Charitable trust as a Manager. He has

roots in the society and his chances of fleeing the course of

justice are minimal. Subject to the stipulation that the applicant

will co-operate with the investigation and would attend the

police station as and when called for, in the wake of vague

allegations contained in the complaint, he is entitled for being

released on bail in anticipation of his arrest. The applicant has

no criminal antecedents and he is ready to co-operate with the

investigation. Hence, the following order.

: ORDER :

(a) In the event of his arrest in C.R.No.523 of 2020 registered

with Rajgad Police Station, the applicant-Ezzakk Shashikumar

Naik shall be released on bail on furnishing P.R.Bond to the

extent of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties of the like amount.

(b) The applicant will report to the police station as and when

called for till filing of the charge-sheet.

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with

facts of case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to

Court or any Police Officer and should not tamper with

evidence.

7. The application is allowed in the aforestated terms.

SMT. BHARATI DANGRE, J


Print Page

No comments:

Post a comment