1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3358 /2009 [ Ratiram Babulal Kaddekar vs. State of Maharashtra) ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. G G Bade, Adv.for applicant Mr C N Adgokar, APP for Respondent .......... CORAM : A.P.BHANGALE, J. DATED : JANUARY 8, 2010. Heard. 2. The applicant is seeking for grant of bail in respect of Crime No.24/2009 for the offence punishable under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Chikhaldara Police Station, Dist. Amravati. On 31st March, 2009 a crime was reported against the applicant in respect of the incident occurred on 28.3.2009 between 2.00 and 3.00 p.m. It is alleged that the victim Ku. Mayuri, aged about 9 years, raped by the applicant. The mother of the victim who had gone to Amravati in connection with some work, after coming to know about the incident from her minor daughter Ku.Mayuri reported the incident to the Police by lodging a detailed report. It also appears that the applicant as well as the victim were subjected to medical examination. Injuries were found on the person of the victim. Incriminating material such as, vaginal swab, clothes etc. have been seized and 2 referred to Expert’s opinion, whose opinion is still awaited. Sessions Case No.143/2009 is pending before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge,Achalpur. 3. Learned Advocate for the applicant contended that the applicant is having a family consisting of his old parents, wife and 8-month old child. He contends that initially the Doctor in the Hospital did not find any external injury on the person of the applicant ; however after 3/4 days when the applicant was medically examined again, abrasions were noticed on his person. Learned Advocate for the applicant posed a question as to how these abrasions were present later on when they were not earlier noticed. 4. According to learned APP at the time of earlier examination, the applicant may not be minutely examined by the Doctor concerned in the hospital and after reference, a detailed examination was carried out. Be that as it may; the victim, according to the prosecution, is of nine years and it is alleged that her mother had found, after disclosure of the incident, that victim was suffering from swelling on her private part, regarding which medical examination has also been carried out. The Doctor concerned had noted the injury as well as observations about it. Furthermore, Expert’s opinion is still awaited. Under these circumstances, considering the serious nature of the offence, which may result in long sentence of imprisonment if the applicant is convicted 3 and prima facie material against the applicant collected so far, I am not inclined to grant bail at this stage. Learned APP states that charge is already framed against the applicant. If that is so, the trial Court shall expedite hearing of the Sessions case and dispose it of as early as possible. If the trial is not commenced within a period of six months from today, liberty to the applicant to move afresh for grant of bail. Application is rejected. JUDGE sahare