1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 1519 of 2010 Kailas Sadashiv Kambale and another ..VERSUS.. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., P.S., Dugguipar, Gondia Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. N.M.Gaidhane, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. M.J.Khan, A.P.P. for the respondent-State. CORAM : Prasanna B. Varale, J. DATED : 14 th Octo ber , 2010 . Heard. By this application, the applicants/accused are seeking enlargement on bail in Crime No. 37/2010, registered at Police Station Duggipur, Gondia, for the offences punishable under Section 363, 366(A), 354, 506 r/w Sec.34 of Indian Penal Code. In the report lodged by the victim/prosecutrix Ku. Aruna Shende, it is stated that on 07/5/2010, she had been to village Palasgaon (Rawat) to attend one marriage. She along with one Minakshi Bendram went for natural call. While returning, they saw one vehicle standing at some distance. One Milind and present applicants were present there. Milind by using force, took the victim/prosecutrix and put her in the vehicle. The applicants closed the doors. Applicant No.1 – Kailash was driving the vehicle. It is further stated in the report that Milind sexually exploited the victim. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the applicants are falsely implicated in the crime due to some rivalry. The applicants are roped in the said offence. Learned Advocate has placed on record one affidavit of of Ms. Minaxi Duliram Bendwar, shown to 2 be verified on 20/9/2010 at Nagpur. The reply is filed by the learned APP for Respondent-State. Learned APP has also produced the record of the case before the Court for perusal. The statements of witnesses recorded by the investigating agency clearly indicates that these applicants were present on the spot and assisted the main accused Milind while commiting the offence. In the reply, serious objection is taken to the affidavit of Ms. Minaxi. It is also stated that the statement of Ku. Minaxi is recorded on 02/10/2010 and in that statement, she stated that she has never visited Nagpur nor any affidavit is given by her. In view of this, learned APP has expressed an apprehension that in the event of enlargement of the applicants on bail, they may tamper with the prosecution evidence. From the record, prima facie, it is clear that there is sufficient material against the present applicants. The apprehension expressed by learned APP is justified. I am of the opinion that this is not a fit case to release the applicants on bail. In the result, the application is rejected and disposed of as such. JUDGE Diwale