Cri. Apln. 4551/2010 1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4551/2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 440/2010 _____________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________ Mr. N.B. Shinde, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S.G. Nandedkar, A.P.P. for respondent/State. Date : 21st December, 2010 1 Heard. 2 The appellant is now seeking bail pending the hearing and disposal of the appeal. The appellant is in custody since he was convicted for offence punishable under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years etc.. 3 Having gone through the record, I found that though the prosecution case is not convincing that the appellant forcibly had sexual intercourse with the victim, it is amply clear from the record that on the date of incident, the victim was merely 13 years old. At the time of filing of complaint, she had given her age as 14 Cri. Apln. 4551/2010 2 years. From ossification test, her age found to be between 14 and 16. The learned judge of the trial Court rejected the arguments for the appellant that the prosecution did not prove the age of the victim. On the face of it, there is nothing on record to indicate that the prosecution had failed to prove the age of the victim. In view of this and the other circumstances of the case, the appellant does not deserve bail. In my view, this is an extremely exceptional case where bail should be refused to the appellant and hearing of the appeal should be expedited. The appellant admittedly is married to the elder sister of the victim. It has also come on record that the appellant has married the sister of the victim as his second wife though his first wife is alive. It has also come on record that at the time of incident, the appellant’s second wife, the sister of the victim was pregnant with the appellant’s child. In view of this, the appellant does not deserve bail. ORDER a) The bail application stands rejected. b) Hearing of the appeal be expedited. c) Paper book shall be prepared within two weeks and the appeal shall be Cri. Apln. 4551/2010 3 fixed for final hearing on 18th January, 2011. [A.V. NIRGUDE, J.] ts k/