1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Criminal Application No.2995 of 2008 And Criminal Application No.3295 of 2008 [a]Criminal Application No.2995 of 2008 : Vijay son of Sukhdeo Chavan, aged about 32 years, occupation – service, resident of Ashraya Nagar, Akola, Tq. & Distt. Akola. .... Applicant. Versus State of Maharashtra, through P.S. Ramdaspeth, through presently investigation with C.I.C. .... Respondent. ***** Mr. S.D. Chopde, Adv., for the applicant. Mr. N.W. Sambre, Public Prosecutor for Respondent. ***** [b]Criminal Application No.3295 of 2008 : Sanjay Ramchandra Pardesi, aged about 47 years, occupation – Police Inspector, Reader Branch, Office of Police Superintendent, Akola, at present in District Prison, Akola. .... Applicant. 2 Versus State of Maharashtra, through P.S. Ramdaspeth, Akola, through presently investigation with CID Department Office, Mumbai Camp, through P.S. Ramdaspeth, Akola. .... Respondent. ***** Mr. S.D. Chopde, Adv., for the applicant. Mr. N.W. Sambre, Public Prosecutor for Respondent. ***** CORAM : A.H.JOSHI, J. Reserved on : 18th September, 2008. Pronounced on : 25th September, 2008. ORAL ORDER : 1. These are applications for grant of bail. 2. Heard after notice. 3. The offence is registered against Smt. Nita Takwat and many others, including present applicants. The offences are under Sections 120-B, 376, 363, 365, 342, 307, 323 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, and Sections 3,4,5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic [Prevention] Act, 1956. What is alleged against present applicants is offence under Section 376 and Section 323 etc., of Indian Penal Code. 3 4. Statement of the complainant was recorded under Section 164 of Criminal Procedure Code. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed. 5. In these premises that charge-sheet is filed and the applicants are in jail for a long time, the applicants are praying for regular bail. 6. By way of grounds for bail, what is urged can be spelt out from the applications and summarized as below:- [a] The Applicants are falsely involved. [b] The charge of rape is vague and false. [c] Statements of complainant are not corroborated. [d] Offence is registered with a political motive. [e] The complainant was above the age of consent when the is said incidents, as alleged, have taken place. [f] Considering the evidence, the complainant must be a consenting party. [g] The applicants are not connected with any offence committed by Nita Takwat. [h] Prima facie, the applicants are not involved in the case. 7. Heard learned Advocate for the applicants and learned Public Prosecutor Mr. N.W. Sasmbre for the 4 respondent. Perused the charge-sheet and documents annexed thereto. 8. It is seen that there prima facie is a positive act of sexual assault alleged against the applicants by the complainant and the incident is not even singular. 9. The alleged rape has occurred when the complainant was in confinement of Accused No.1 – Smt.Nita Takwat, and the accused had availed free access to the complainant. 10. The allegations of assault are made against the applicants-accused. 11. Considering the collective effect, at this stage, it cannot be concluded, even for consideration of bail from what appears prima facie, that the accused are not guilty. 12. Therefore, the applicants have no case for bail. 13. In the circumstances, applications are rejected. JUDGE -0-0-0-0- |hedau| 5