1
BA No.476/2024
MHCC020032082024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT GREATER BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO.476 OF 2024
Manoj Babulal Mochi
Aged 22 years, Occu. : Wager
R/at. Room No.C­82, Dadamia Chawl,
Davari Nagar, Gate No.01,
Santacruz (East), Mumbai.

..Applicant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Vakola
Police Station, Mumbai in
C.R. No.64/2024).

..Respondent
Appearance :­
Advocate Mr. Tanmay Jadhav for the applicant.
APP Mr. R.V. Tiwari for the respondent/State.
CORAM : HHJ SHRI N.G. SHUKLA,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 29.
DATED : 07/03/2024
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
1.

Applicant/accused who is arrested in Crime No.64/2024 for
the offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code has filed
this application for bail under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal
2
BA No.476/2024
Procedure. Prosecution filed reply at Exh.2 and informant filed reply at
Exh.3 and opposed the application.

2.

I have heard learned Advocate Tanmay Jadhav for applicant,
Learned APP Mr. R.V. Tiwari for prosecution and informant in person.

3.

As per FIR, accused is real cousin brother of informant and
staying behind the house of informant. Accused used to come and stay at
the house of informant. It is alleged that in the early morning of
15.01.2024, when informant was sleeping, accused came and inserted his
finger in private part of informant. Due to sensation, informant woke up
and saw the accused doing said heinous act. When she shouted and her
brother also seen the incident. Accused started running from there. Brother
and father of informant caught and her father slapped him. He ran away
from there. Sisters of accused came after sometime and pray apology. After
discussion with parents, informant lodged report of aforesaid incident.

4.

Learned advocate for applicant/accused submitted that, there
is property dispute between families of accused and informant.
Applicant/accused had seen informant with one boy prior to 2­3 of the
incident and he told said fact to her brother. In anger thereof and because
of property dispute, informant lodged false report. Accused is behind bar
since more than 1 month. Investigation is almost completed. Statement of
informant under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. can be recorded and remaining
investigation may be carried out by imposing conditions on accused. He has
no criminal antecedent. He is ready to abide any condition. Hence, learned
advocate prayed to allow the application.

3
5.

BA No.476/2024
Learned APP instructed by IO submitted that investigation is in
progress. Statement of informant is not yet recorded. If released on bail,
accused may pressurize the informant and tamper the evidence. Hence,
learned APP prayed to reject the application.
6.

Informant in person present and opposed the bail application
by submitting that false story of dispute of property is narrated. There is no
such dispute of property or the informant was not seen with one boy by the
applicant. Sisters of applicant/accused threatening to informant. Hence,
she prayed to reject the application.
7.

I have considered submissions and perused the record. It
appears from FIR that applicant/accused is none other than real brother of
informant. He was on visiting terms at the house of informant and he was
seen by brother of the informant doing the heinous act. Informant had also
perceived the alleged act of accused though she was sleeping. At this stage,
there is no material to disbelieve the contents of FIR. There is no any
document placed by accused on record to show the property dispute.
Insertion of any object in the private part of woman is covered by definition
of Sec.375 of Indian Penal Code. Thus, prima­facie there are circumstances
showing involvement of accused in hoariness crime.
8.

Say of police shows that, statement of informant under Section
164 of Cr.P.C. is yet to be recorded. Informant is residing near the house of
accused. She has already stated that sisters of accused are threatening to
her. In such circumstances, there are chances of tampering the evidence
and pressurizing the informant. Accused is not entitled for bail at least till
filing charge­sheet. Hence, I pass following order :­
4
BA No.476/2024
ORDER
Bail Application No.476/2024 is rejected and accordingly disposed of.

Date : 07/03/2024
(N.G. Shukla)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil and Sessions Court,
Greater Bombay
5
BA No.476/2024
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER
Name of Stenographer
Upload date and time
Name of the Judge
: Mrs. Shravanti Karre
: 07th March, 2024 (At 05.55 pm.)

H.H.THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
SHRI N. G. SHUKLA (C.R.No.29)
Date of Pronouncement of Order 07th March, 2024
Order signed by P.O. on
07th March, 2024
Order uploaded on
07th March, 2024