RAHUL @ BABA KAUTIK JANJAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Natu, learned counsel appearing for applicant and Shri Shinde, learned APP appearing for State.

(2.) The applicant is being prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 377, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and also under Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act. The applicant was arrested in the present crime on 3rd May, 2018 and since then he is behind the bars. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the present applicant is stated to have subsequently identified by the accused as a third person involved in the commission of the alleged crime, whereupon he has been arrested by the police and impleaded as an accused in the present case.

(3.) The learned counsel further submitted that the alleged incident is stated to have happened some time in the month of December 2017, FIR of which came to be lodged by father of the victim on 4.4.2018. In pursuance of the said FIR, two accused, viz. Hrishikesh Prakash Tujare and Yogesh Ganesh Kardile were arrested earlier. Father of the victim on 3rd May, 2018 gave a supplementary statement in the matter disclosing involvement of the present applicant in commission of the alleged crime. The learned counsel further submitted that the manner in which the applicant is said to have been identified by the victim appears unconscionable. The learned counsel further submitted that even if everything is accepted, in view of the fact that now charge sheet has been filed, there seems no reason in keeping the present applicant behind the bars. The learned counsel further submitted that the applicant is ready to get abide by any conditions which may be imposed by the court while releasing him on bail. It is further contended that the applicant is young boy aged of 21 years and in such circumstances, his incarceration before the trial may not be advisable.