1 Cri.Appln.No.1915/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1915 OF 2011 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.228 OF 2011 Kakasaheb s/o Haribhau Kamble ... APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra ... RESPONDENT ..... Shri Shrikishan S. Shinde, Advocate for applicant Shri N.H. Borade, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM : U.D. SALVI, J. DATED : 6th September, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. Perused application and the record. 2. The applicant/ accused, a man aged 55 years, has been convicted of the offence of rape, punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Learned trial Court found his involvement in the offence on the basis of the testimonies of the prosecutrix, a 22 year old married lady, her in-laws, and the result of forensic investigation. 2 Cri.Appln.No.1915/2011 3. The prosecution revealed before the trial Court that the applicant/ accused, sent by the parents of the prosecutrix to bring about the matrimonial peace between the prosecutrix and her husband, seized an opportunity to rape the prosecutrix while her husband and mother-in-law had left the matrimonial home, for fetching provisions in the morning of 10.11.2008. According to the prosecution, he asked Kesharbai, sister of the mother-in-law of the prosecutrix to leave the home so that he could get the desired circumstances to commit the offence and after Kesharbai left, leaving the prosecutrix, and the accused alone, the accused pressed the mouth of the prosecutrix, made her fall on the ground and threatened her not to disclose the fact for the fear of not settling the matrimonial dispute and thereafter raped her within the confines of the matrimonial home of the prosecutrix. 4. C.A. report confirms the fact of sexual intercourse between the prosecutrix and the applicant/accused inasmuch semen stains belonging to the blood group of the accused were detected on the petticoat of the prosecutrix as well as on the Chaddi of the accused. 5. Learned Advocate for the applicant/ accused submitted that, the absence of external injuries on prosecutrix spell out that there was no forcible intercourse and the prosecutrix was a 3 Cri.Appln.No.1915/2011 consenting party to the sexual intercourse and as such, there is no offence of rape as alleged. According to him, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Firstly, it can be seen that there was no reason for the applicant/ accused who posed himself as a mediator in a matrimonial dispute, to have the sexual intercourse with the person whose interest he had come to protect. Naturally he enjoyed the unique position which it appears, he exploited by administering threats to the prosecutrix. There is no reason for the prosecutrix to testify against the applicant/ accused and falsely implicate him in the present case. Combination of threats and force has its effect particularly on paralysing the resistance of the victim. Prima facie the case of rape is revealed. 6. Hence, the application is rejected. ( U.D. SALVI, J. ) fmp/cri1915.11