1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No. 1615 of 2010 Bablu Baiju Gour ..VERSUS.. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O., P.S., Ganeshpeth, Nagpur Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. R.S.Nayak, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. A.Parihar, APP for State. CORAM : Prasanna B. Varale, J. DATED : 22 th Octo ber , 2010 . Heard. This is an application filed by the applicant for grant of regular bail in Crime No. 92/2010, registered with Police Station Ganeshpeth, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Section 376, 417, 506(B) of IPC. The victim/prosecutrix namely Roshni Sudamji Pakkide lodged report alleging therein that the applicant established intimacy with her and on 11/3/2010 administered something causing drowsiness mixed in the juice. Then the applicant took her to Shop No.17, Cotton Market where she became unconscious. After getting consciousness, she found herself in naked condition and also found that she has been raped. On asking as to why he committed this act, the applicant promised to marry her. Thereafter, when she asked the applicant to fulfill the promise of marriage, he flatly refused to marry her. He showed her the video-graphy film of intercourse on mobile phone and threatened to defame her and also threated to kill her. Learned Advocate for the applicant submits that the report/complaint lodged against the applicant on 07/6/2010 in Ganeshpeth Police Station is an outcome of refusal by the applicant to get married with the victim. He further submits that the applicant is falsely involved in the said crime. Learned Advocate invites my 2 attention to the report lodged by the victim on 07/6/2010 at Police Station, Koradi against the applicant, wherein there is no mention about the sexual exploitation at the hands of the applicant and it mentions only about the alleged abuses given by the applicant. Learned APP has filed reply and opposed the application. In the reply, learned APP has stated that the offences registered against the applicant are serious in nature. As per the statement of the victim, she is not only sexually exploited by the applicant, but also the applicant videographed the intimacy on his mobile phone. It is further stated that the applicant is having previous criminal antecedent at his credit and placed on record a chart showing offences registered against the applicant at various police stations. Learned APP submits that if the applicant is released on bail, there is every possibility of tampering with the prosecution evidence or threatening the witnesses. Learned APP, therefore, prayed for rejection of the application. In view of the material collected by the investigating agency, I find prima facie case to connect the applicant with the present crime. The apprehension expressed by the investigating agency is justified. In my opinion, this is not a fit case to grant bail to the applicant. In the result, the application is rejected. Criminal Application (APPP) No. 984/2010 In view of final disposal of Cri. Application No. 1615/2010, the present application has become infructuous. In the result, the application is disposed of as infructuous. JUDGE Diwale