cran3370.11 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3370 OF 2011 Gorakh s/o Rakhmaji Kachgunde ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent ..... Mr. Sushil Landge, advocate for the applicant Mrs. R.K. Ladda, A.P.P. for respondent ..... CORAM: SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. DATED: 9TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 PER COURT:- 1 Heard learned counsel for the respective parties finally. Perused the investigation papers, which were made available for inspection. 2 This is an application preferred by the applicant Gorakh Kachgunde seeking regular bail in connection with crime No. 36 of 2011 registered at Ambajogai (City) police station, District Beed for the offences punishable under Sections 376 of I.P.C. and 3(1) (xii) and 3(2) (v) of S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. cran3370.11 -2- 3 It appears that the crime has been registered on the basis of complaint lodged by the prosecutrix-the complainant viz. Kavita Ganesh Ujgare on 24.2.2011 alleging that on 23.2.2011 at about 8.30 p.m. she was ravished by one truck driver viz. Ashok. He pressed her breast and committed rape on her. During the said act, her left hand bangles were broken and thereafter he fled away. Admittedly, the name of the applicant is Gorakh Kachgunde and not Ashok. Apparently, F.I.R. discloses that the complainant stated the name of the accused only Ashok and she did not know his full name. However, in the supplementary statement on 27.2.2011, after showing a photograph by police personnel to the complainant, the complainant asked the name of the person in the photograph and the police personnel thereafter stated his name as Gorakh Rakhmaji Kachgunde and consequently, the charge sheet discloses the name of the accused as Ashok @ Gorakhnath Rakhmaji Kachgunde. However, admittedly, the said aspect creates suspicion in respect of the identity of the culprit. 4 Apart from that, the learned counsel for the applicant invited my attention to the aspect that the very complaint dated 24.2.2011 lodged by the complainant discloses her mobile No. 9372242444 and it is pointed that mobile seized from the applicant during the course of investigation is having number 7798094117 and further he invited my cran3370.11 -3- attention to the telephone record produced by the prosecution itself in the charge sheet that there was telephonic conversation between the complainant Kavita and the applicant on these two mobiles since 19.17 hours on 23.2.2011 till 23.01 hours on 23.2.2011. The alleged incident occurred at about 8.30 p.m. on 23.2.2011. Accordingly, the learned APP asserted that there was telephonic conversion between these two mobiles at the very time of the incident i.e. at 8.32 p.m. on 23.2.2011. Hence, the very telephonic record creates suspicion about the theory advanced by the prosecution in respect of occurrence of incident of rape upon the prosecutrix by the applicant herein. 5 Moreover, investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed. The applicant is in custody since 23.3.2011 and there is no propriety in keeping the applicant behind bars any further more and therefore, he deserves to be enlarged on bail. 6 In the result, the application is allowed and it is directed that the applicant Gorakh s/o Rakhmaji Kachgunde, be released on bail in C.R. No. 36 of 2011 registered at Ambajogi (city) police station, District Beed, on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount on the following conditions;- cran3370.11 -4- i) The applicant shall not influence upon witnesses and more particularly the prosecutrix and/or tamper with the evidence, in any manner whatsoever, directly/indirectly. ii) The applicant shall give attendance before the in charge of the concerned police station once in a fortnight till disposal of the case. Iii) The applicant shall not leave the limits of Ambajogai Taluka, district Beed without prior permission of the learned trial court. 8 Present criminal application stands disposed of finally. ( SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J. ) rlj/