1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application [BA] No. 320 of 2011 (Deepak S/o. Gopichand Sundewal Vs. State of Maharashtra) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. A.J. Thakkar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. D.P. Patel, APP for the State/non-applicant. CORAM : M.N. GILANI, J. DATE : 4 th JULY, 2011. Heard. Applicant is being tried in Sessions Case No. 28/2010 on the file of Additional Sessions Court, Akot, District Akola, for the offences punishable under Sections 376(g), 377, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Bail application moved before learned Additional Sessions Judge, was rejected by order dated 07/03/2011. Thereafter, Criminal Application No. 1708/2010 was presented to this Court. This Court (Coram – Prasanna B. Varale, J) rejected the application after considering the merits of the case. Learned Judge made a reference to the statement of prosecutrix and her son and observed that, “in view of the strong material, I am of the opinion that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail”. The applicant, after receipt of the report of the Chemical Analyzer, filed second bail application, bearing Misc. Cri. Application No. 31/2011, before learned Additional Sessions Judge, which was decided on 07/03/2011. Learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected the same after observing that there is no change in the circumstances. Learned counsel for the applicant invited my attention to the report of Chemical Analyzer, dated 25/01/2011. It pertains to the examination of clothes, which were on the person of the prosecutrix and the accused. On the petticoat, few semen stains 2 were detected. On other articles i.e. full-pant, panty and jangya, no semen nor blood stains were detected. The other report of Chemical Analyzer pertains to nails and pubic hair. No blood was detected in the nails and no semen nor spermatozoa was detected in the sample of pubic hair. The third Chemical Analyzer's report pertains to examination of vaginal swab and pubic hair. Neither semen nor spermatozoa were detected in vaginal swab and pubic hair. The negative report is a foundation for the second bail application. Absence of semen or spermatozoa in the vaginal swab or on the pubic hair cannot be an evidence of innocence of the accused particularly at this stage. These facts are required to be considered at the time of trial while assessing the entire prosecution evidence. In view of the fact that the earlier application to release the applicant on bail was already rejected by this Court, on the touchstone of propriety, this application cannot be considered merely on the ground that finding recorded by the Chemical Analyzer are supporting the accused. Hence, application is rejected. JUDGE *Sdw