Whether court should reject bail application of accused for offence of Voyeurism?

 I have perused the photographs. The photographs which were
uploaded on different porn websites contain sexually explicit
act/conduct. Thus, the material on record prima facie indicates that
the applicant is involved in committing offence under Section 353(A)
and 354(C) of IPC as well as under Section 67 and 67A of the

Information Technology Act. The offence under Section 67A of the
Information Technology Act is nonbailable
offence. It is true that
the said offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which
may extend to 5 years. However, considering the fact that the
victims are two young girls, and there is every possibility of the
applicant pressurizing the said victim girls and thereby thwarting the
course of justice, in my considered view, this would not be a fit case
to release the applicant on bail at this stage. Hence, the application
is dismissed.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2304 OF 2017

Akshay  v/s. The State of Maharashtra 

CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI,J.
DATED : OCTOBER 15, 2018.



1. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. filed by the
aforesaid applicant, who is facing trial in R.C.C. No. 1171 of 2017
pending before the learned JMFC, Nashik for offences under Section
354(a) and 354(c) as well as Section 67 and 67A of the Information
Technology Act, 2000.
2. Heard Mr. Mundargi, the learned Sr. Counsel for the applicant
and Ms. Lohokare, the learned APP for the State. I have perused the

records and considered the submissions advanced by the learned
Counsels for the respective parties.
3. The records prima facie reveal that the aforesaid crime was
registered pursuant to the FIR lodged by the victim. A perusal of the
FIR reveals that the applicant herein had disrobed her, had made
physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit
sexual overtures and taken her nude photographs and uploaded the
same on 145 different porn websites. The material on record also
indicates that the applicant had also taken such photographs of
another victim and had also uploaded the said photographs on
various porn websites. The mobile phone and laptop of the
applicant were seized and were sent to Forensic Laboratory at Kalina.
The report prima facie indicates that the said pictures were uploaded
from the mobile and laptop of the applicant.
4. I have perused the photographs. The photographs which were
uploaded on different porn websites contain sexually explicit
act/conduct. Thus, the material on record prima facie indicates that
the applicant is involved in committing offence under Section 353(A)
and 354(C) of IPC as well as under Section 67 and 67A of the

Information Technology Act. The offence under Section 67A of the
Information Technology Act is nonbailable
offence. It is true that
the said offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which
may extend to 5 years. However, considering the fact that the
victims are two young girls, and there is every possibility of the
applicant pressurizing the said victim girls and thereby thwarting the
course of justice, in my considered view, this would not be a fit case
to release the applicant on bail at this stage. Hence, the application
is dismissed.
5. The learned Sessions Judge is directed to frame charge and to
record evidence of the victims within a period of four months from
the date of this Order. The applicant is at liberty to file fresh
application after the evidence of the two victim girls is recorded.
. Application stands disposed of in above terms.
(ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Print Page