- Case
- PRASHANT SAKHARAM ATRE v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR (Bombay High Court, 20-03-2025)
- Law
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Indian Penal Code, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Code of Criminal Procedure, Constitution of India.
Facts: The applicant, a school bus driver, is accused of sexually assaulting an 8-year-old girl who was a student on his bus. The prosecution alleges that the applicant stopped the bus, took the victim aside, and sexually assaulted her. The victim's statement and statements from other students support the prosecution's case. The applicant sought bail, arguing that as a first-time offender who had served two years, he was entitled to release under Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which allows for release on bond after serving one-third of the maximum imprisonment.
Procedural Posture: This is the second bail application filed by the applicant. The first bail application was withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh application if the trial was not concluded within one year. The present bail application was filed pursuant to that liberty. The applicant is seeking bail based on Section 479 of the BNSS, arguing he has served the requisite detention period.
Issue: Is the applicant entitled to bail under Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) as a first-time offender who has undergone detention for a period extending up to one-third of the maximum period of imprisonment, considering the nature and gravity of the alleged offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act? Does the second proviso to Section 479(1) of BNSS, which allows the court to order continued detention, apply to first-time offenders?
Holding: No, the applicant is not entitled to bail. The bail application is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Court reasoned that even considering Section 479 of the BNSS, the merits of the case must be considered. The Court emphasized the seriousness and heinous nature of the crime, given the victim's age and the applicant's position of trust. The Court held that the second proviso to Section 479(1) of the BNSS, which allows the court to order continued detention even after completion of one-half of the sentence, also applies to first-time offenders. The court relied on the principles of statutory interpretation, stating that a proviso carves out an exception to the main provision, and the second proviso gives the court the power to order continued detention based on factors like the gravity of the offense, the accused's position, and the likelihood of tampering with witnesses. The court found that the material on record prima facie showed the applicant's involvement in a grave offense, and therefore, no case was made out for grant of bail on merits. The court also noted that even if the applicant's argument regarding the maximum punishment was accepted, he had not completed one-third of the maximum punishment, considering the potential offenses under the POCSO Act.
