1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JUTISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4819 OF 2009 Bhagwat @ Babu Murlidhar Walekar .... Applicant. V/s The State of Maharashtra ..... Respondent. Mr. Rajeev Patil i/b Mr. V.V. Purwant for the applicant. Mrs. S.D. Shinde, APP for the State. CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 7TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. Applicant was arrested in connection with the complaint filed by the prosecutrix for the offence punishable under sections 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code with the Karmala Police Station vide C.R. No.213 of 2009. 2 3. Counsel for the applicant submitted that the prosecutrix is in the habit of filing false complaints and she is in business of manufacturing and selling of illicit liquor. It is submitted that the prosecutrix has, in the past, filed similar false and frivolous complaints against several other respectable persons in the said village and had, later on, turned hostile after accepting money from them. It is submitted that the prosecutrix is a habitual blackmailer. As a result of the said activities of the prosecutrix, a Resolution was passed in Gram Sabha to take action against the said prosecutrix. The said Resolution was passed on 15/8/2009. It is clearly mentioned in the said Resolution that the prosecutrix is in the habit of filing false cases of rape and molestation and is in the habit of blackmailing people and, therefore, action should be taken against her and immediately after a period of eight days, the present complaint has been filed by the prosecutrix against the applicant herein. 4. This Court had asked the learned APP to verify from the Investigating Officer whether such Resolution had been passed in the said meeting of Gram Sambha. The learned APP had verified this fact and submitted, on the instructions given by Investigating Officer A.C. Deshmukh, A.P.I., Karmala Police 3 Station, that such a Resolution, in fact, was passed in the said meeting of the Gram Panchayat held on 15/8/2009. The learned Counsel for the applicant has also annexed certain decisions of the Court wherein complaints of outraging of modesty filed by the prosecutrix were dismissed since the prosecutrix had turned hostile. Apart from bare statement of the prosecutrix, there is no material on record to indicate that the applicant was responsible for commission of the said offence. 5. In the present case, investigation is almost over and, as such, continued detention of the applicant, in my view, is not necessary more particularly taking into consideration the unanimous Resolution passed by the Gram Sabha in its meeting held on 15/8/2009. Admittedly, applicant has been carrying on business of manufacturing and selling of illicit liquor. The record also indicates that several complaints filed by the prosecutrix were dismissed when the prosecutrix turned hostile. 6. Under these circumstances, applicant deserves to be released on bail in C.R. No.213 of 2009 registered with Karmala Police Station, Solapur in the sum of Rs 5000/­ with one or two sureties in the like amount. Applicant shall report to the concerned Police Station once in a month. 4 7. Application is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.)