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
No comments:
Post a Comment