jpc ba1130-11.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1130 OF 2011 Premji Patanshi Faria ... Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. S. R. Borulkar i/by Mr. Chandrakant P. Yadav, for the applicant Mrs. S.D. Shinde, APP for the State CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 9th August, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Yadav, the learned advocate for the applicant and Mrs. Shinde, the learned APP for the State. 2. I have gone through the bail application and the annexures thereto. The learned APP has shown the police papers and all the statements, recorded in the course of investigation, so far. I have gone through the same. 3. The applicant is alleged to have committed rape on the prosecutrix - a married woman- on 4th February, 2011. The story goes that the applicant, who is a grocery shop owner, was known to the prosecutrix since before the incident and that the prosecutrix used to make purchases from the applicant's shop. That, on 4th February, 2011, jpc ba1130-11.sxw 2 at about 12 noon, when the husband of the prosecutrix was away from the house, the applicant entered inside the house. The prosecutrix's son aged about 4 years was in the house. The applicant threatened the victim, by picking up a knife in the kitchen, that she should not shout or else, he would kill her son. Thereafter, the applicant committed rape on her. When the intercourse was going on, the husband of the prosecutrix came inside the house. The applicant ran away, but the husband of the prosecutrix chased him and assaulted him. 4. After carefully going through the statements recorded during the course of investigation, the possibility of the prosecutrix being a consenting party to the sexual intercourse cannot altogether be ruled out. The prosecutrix mentioned that earlier also once she had been raped by the applicant but that, at that time she did not tell about it to her husband as he is head-strong. It also appears that the applicant was badly beaten by the husband of the prosecutrix and was required to be hospitalized for period of about one month. 5. Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter and since it does not appear that the detention of the applicant is essential for the purpose of investigation, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail, subject to certain conditions. jpc ba1130-11.sxw 3 6. The application is allowed. 7. The applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs. 40,000/- (Rupees forty thousand) with one surety in like amount, on the following conditions: (a)The applicant shall not visit the building Ganesh Apartment, Shivai Nagar,Thane,for any purpose whatsoever, till the disposal of the case against him. (b)The applicant shall not contact, meet or approach any of the prosecution witnesses in any manner whatsoever. (A.M. THIPSAY, J.)