1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.: 474 OF 2006 WITH CRI. REVN. APPLN. NO.: Shivaji S/o Uttam Ambad and another Versus State of Maharashtra and another *** Mr. M. R. Choudhari, Advocate i/b Mr. D. J. Choudhari, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs. B. R. Khekale, A.P.P. for the Respondent/ State. *** 1. Heard learned counsel for the accused/ applicant and learned A.P.P. Rule. By consent the application is heard finally. 2. The proceeding vide Crime NO.387 of 2005 under section 354, 324 read with 34 of the IPC and under section 3 (1) (x) (2) of the S.C. & S.T. (Protection of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is sought to be quashed. 3. On going through the report of the victim Sharda, aged 19 years, the incident she has narrated is prima facie supported by a letter issued to the medical officer wherein her father Manik and said 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. Sharda were to be examined by the medical officer. That apart, the eye witnesses also supports contention of said Sharda. In the situation, it cannot be said that the prosecution is absurd or flowing from some other reasons. Consequently, no interference in terms of section 482 of Cr.P.C. Criminal Application NO.474 of 2006 is rejected. Rule discharged. Interim protection dated 13th February, 2006 stands vacated. [K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.] Dated:05/09/2009. ans/474