{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1424 OF 2010 Nagnath s/o Namdeo Pawar ... APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ....... Mr. N.P. Patil Jamalpurkar, Advocate for the applicant Mr. P.P. More, A.P.P. for the respondent ....... CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE. J. DATE: 7th May, 2010. PER COURT: 1. Heard Mr. N.P. Patil Jamalpurkar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as heard Mr. P.P. More, learned A.P.P. for the respondent. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant for seeking bail in connection with C.R. No.8/2010, registered with Murud Police Station, District Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(11), 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) {2} Act, since the applicant was arrested thereunder on 15.1.2010 and he is under judicial custody presently. 3. It appears that, the offence has been registered on the complaint lodged by the complainant namely Balbhim Vithoba Bhandare on 8.1.2010, alleging that he is working as a labourer and his brothers namely Bhagwat, Bhanudas and Balaji are also working as labourers at Puine. The victim namely Nilubai is his sister-in-law and her husband namely Balaji is also working as labourer with the applicant/ accused at Pune, who is a building contractor. It is also alleged that, the applicant returned to his village Andhora and at that time, the husband of victim asked him to give amount to his wife for Sankrant festival. It is also alleged that, the applicant visited the house of the victim Nilubai who used to sell bangles and also used to do the labour work. 4. The said complaint further recites that, on 13.1.2010 at about 12.00 noon, victim Nilubai went to purchase bangles for Sankrant festival, but she did not return to his house on that day. Thereafter, on 14.1.2010, the police patil of village was informed by Bapusaheb Londhe that the victim Nilubai was lying in injured condition at Nivali road. Accordingly, the informant went at the spot, and saw Nilubai in injured condition and she allegedly disclosed {3} before him and police patil that she was assaulted by the applicant as well as raped by him. The statement of Nilubai was recorded by Executive Magistrate. 5. On the aforesaid background, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, although the incident occurred on 13.1.2010, the F.I.R. came to be lodged belatedly on 15.1.2010 at about 3.00 p.m. It is also canvassed that, the applicant is a married person having children as well as Nilubai is married person and she in fact gave company voluntarily to the applicant for two days, and insisted upon the applicant to marry with him, which was not possible for him and, therefore, she threatened the applicant to jump from the car and accordingly, she jumped from the car and sustained the injuries, and consequently, her teeth were also broken during the said incident. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that, Nilubai in her statemnet simply alleged that rape was committed upon her but no other particulars and details were furnished therein. Accordingly, the learned counsel urged for granting of bail, contending that the applicant is in judicial custody since last more than four months. 6. The learned A.P.P. opposed the present application vehemently and submitted that Bapusaheb Londhe initially noticed {4} that victim Nilubai was lying in a ditch on road side and accordingly, he gave information to police patil who arrived at the spot and the victim Nilubai stated before him about the alleged assault of rape committed by her by the applicant herein and the statement of said police patil discloses the said aspects. Moreover, it is also canvassed by learned A.P.P. that spot panchanama discloses that the broken teeth and pieces of bangles were found on the place of incident. Moreover, it is further submitted that, the statement of victim Nilubai is self explicit, which narrates the entire incident and connects the applicant with the alleged crime and, therefore, the learned A.P.P. submitted that, the present application bears no substance and same is devoid of any merits and, therefor,e same be rejected. 7. On perusal of documents and after considering the rival submissions advanced by both the learned respective counsel for the parties, the statement of police patil categorically discloses that the victim Nilubai stated before him that the applicant assaulted her and committed rape upon her. Moreover, the statement of victim Nilubai is self explanatory and categorically reflects that the applicant assaulted her and committed rape upon her. Accordingly, both the said statements apparently connect the applicant with the alleged crime. Moreover, the contents of spot panchanama strengthens the said aspect which discloses that broken teeth and pieces of bangles were {5} found at the place of incident. It is specifically alleged in the complaint that due to assault, 7 teeth of victim were broken. The medical examination report of the victim Nilubai discloses that, "Final opinion about sexual intercourse / rape will be given after Chemical Analyser's report of vaginal swab. After radiological examination of X-ray according to Radiologist, her age is above 25 years." 8. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am inclined to accept the submissions advanced by learned A.P.P. and although investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed, considering the nature and gravity of the offence and seriousness thereof, I am of the view that, present application deserves to be rejected. In the result, present application being sans merits, stands dismissed. 9. Needless to say that the above observations are prima facie in nature and shall not come in way of any Court while deciding the matter on merits. SHRIHARI P. DAVARE JUDGE fmp/cri1424.10