1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2386/2009 IN CRI. APPEAL NO.316/2009 === Mukund s/o Baburao Jadhav and another. Applicants. V E R S U S The State of Maharashtra and another. Respondents. Smt. S.S. Jadhav, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri S.G.Nandedkar, APP for State. Shri N.L.Dharashive for R-2. ==== CORAM : K. U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 06TH OCTOBER, 2009. PER COURT :- 1. Heard Smt. Jadhav for the accused-applicants, Ld. APP and Shri N.L.Dharashive appearing for original complainant-victim. The accused-applicant was prosecuted in Sessions Case No.66/1998 for the offence of committing gang rape on the victim prosecutrix. The Ld. Sessions Judge after examination of the witness and perusal of the documents by his order dated 07.11.1998 acquitted the accused- 2 applicants herein. 2. The aggrieved victim/prosecutrix preferred criminal revision application No.431/1998 before this Court and by order dated 21.08.2008 the judgment of acquittal was set aside with the directions to the Ld. Principal District Judge, Latur to re-examine the relevant evidence and decide the same afresh within a reasonable frame of time. Owing to the directions, the Ld. Sessions Judge, Latur re-heard the matter and by judgment and order dated June 16, 2009 convicted the accused- applicants Mukund s/o Baburao Jadhav and Pandit s/o Keshav Jadhav for offence under section 376 (2) (g), 504 r.w 34 of Indian Penal Code to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each. The accused-applicants are in custody from the date of judgment. 3. The counsel for the accused-applicant submits that indeed the matter is worked out between the accused applicants Mukund, Pandit with the prosecutrix Smt. Sunita. It is by an affidavit she has stated that she has no objection to release the accused-applicants on bail. 4. Though I find such concession and remission showered by the prosecutrix, it should not be a barometer for release of the accused 3 applicant on bail as showing of zenith of generosity by said prosecutrix apparently could be surrounded with other consideration. The fact remains it is society which has to face brunt of such eventualities. The diabolical act referred by the prosecutrix giving rise to the conviction in the matter of gang rape, by concession, exerted by the prosecutrix, should not weigh for this Court to favorably consider the matter. 5. The Ld. Counsel repeatedly pointed out alleged cavelian approach of the Ld. Sessions Judge as he on the same set of evidence earlier acquitted accused and has by virtue of the directions of this Court in criminal revision application No.431/1998, has reviewed his order. I need not to comment on this as it revolves to arena of appreciation of evidence which can well be done at the appropriate time. 5. The fact situation in which the offence has taken place, and proved I am not inclined to allow the bail application such release will have adverse ramification to the witnesses who couraged against the accused. However, a concession is given to the accused-applicants, that appeal can finally be heard in January, 2010. The counsel for the accused applicants shall make endeavor to furnish private paper book 4 up to 18th December, 2009. Record and proceedings is already received pursuant to the earlier directions. Application rejected with above observations. [ K. U. CHANDIWAL, J. ) JUDGE. ..... aaa/2386.09