(1) CRI. APLN. 4638.2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4638 OF 2010 Gahininath Babasaheb Khedkar, Age : 43 years, Occu.: Agri., R/o : Ghatsheel Pargaon, Tq. Shirur Kasar, Dist. Beed Applicant VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. The Police Inspector, Shirur Police Station, District Beed Respondents ..... Smt. S.S. Jadhav, Advocate h/f. Mr. A.B. Girase, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. D.V. Tele, A.P.P. for the Respondent/State. ..... CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J. DATED : 22ND DECEMBER, 2010 ORAL ORDER:- 1. This is an Application under section 438 of the Cr.P.C. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant and learned A.P.P. 2. The applicant apprehends arrest on the ground of filing of private complaint case by the complainant, namely, Shobha Pandurang Aghav which has been referred for investigation under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. On basis of the private complaint, (2) CRI. APLN. 4638.2010 crime no. 101 of 2010 came to be registered at Shirur Kasar Police Station. 3. Considering the rival submissions and the relevant aspects of the matter, it is manifest that the complainant could not pull on well with her previous husband. She had filed maintenance proceedings, wherein she alleged that she was driven out of the matrimonial house on 9.5.2010 for the reason that she could not deliver any child. It appears prima facie that she and her previous husband by name Kishor Palve settled the matrimonial dispute on 11.6.2010. The private complaint application purports to show that thereafter the applicant promised to marry her. He took her from place to place and kept sexual relationship with her. It is alleged that she was allured to give consent for the sexual intercourse under the false promise of marriage. It is pertinent to notice that the applicant is a married person. The complainant appears to be sufficiently wise enough to know that the second marriage was impermissible for the applicant. The complainant appears to be experienced due to her unsuccessful marriage with Kishor Palve (3) CRI. APLN. 4638.2010 and could have probably taken lesson when the marriage had fallen on the rocks. It is yet to be ascertained whether the consent of the complainant was under the false promise given by the applicant to marry her. 4. Considering the aforementioned reasons, I find that the arrest of the applicant is likely to humiliate him without much reason. Hence, the Application is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand) before the Arresting Officer and on further condition that he shall attend the concerned Police Station on each Sunday between 10.00 a.m. to 2.00 pm. and shall effectively participate during the course of investigation. His failure to attend the concerned Police Station may entail cancellation of the bail. He shall attend the concerned Police Station for six weeks hereafter on each Sunday or till filing of the final report/chargesheet, whichever is earlier. Sd/- [V. R. KINGAONKAR, J.] arp