IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1439 OF 2008 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1341 OF 2008 Abdul Kadar Ahmad Badsha Shaikh ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ... Respondent --- Ms. Anjali Patil for Applicant Mr.D.P. Adsule, APP for the State ---- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED 19TH DECEMBER, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant and the Learned APP for the State. 2. The Applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under sections 363, 366, 376 r/w. section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years. 3. The prosecution case is that the Applicant took away the prosecutrix, who was 13 years of age and committed rape on her. The defence of the accused is that the prosecutrix is his legally wedded wife and that the priest has performed the marriage ceremony and nikah nama was signed by the prosecutrix. According to the Applicant, the age of the prosecutrix is 20 years, whereas according to the prosecution, the age of the prosecutrix is 13 years. No certificate has been produced by the prosecution to establish that she was 13 years at the time of the incident in question. The prosecution has produced on record the medical evidence at Exhibit 27, wherein the Medical Officer found the age of the victim girl is 13 to 14 years. The mother of the prosecutrix has admitted that the Applicant had married with the prosecutrix and she has no objection to the said marriage. 4. The learned APP for the State has invited my attention to the evidence of the prosecutrix, wherein she has stated that the Applicant had sexual relation with one girl by name Heena, who was also working in the factory. It is submitted that the Applicant was sexually exploiting the young girl, who was working in his factory. 5. The learned Counsel for the Applicant, however, has invited my attention to the cross examination of the prosecutrix, wherein she had admitted that the entire incident of the Applicant having sexual relations with Heena, is not mentioned in the police complaint and this was a clear improvement made by the prosecutrix. 6. Taking into consideration these facts, in my view, prima facie case is made out by the Applicant for grant of bail. 7. The Applicant be released on bail in a sum of Rs.5,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. The Applicant shall report to Trombay Police Station once in a week. V.M. KANADE J.