1 cri4059.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4059 OF 2011 Abdul Sattar Mohd. Attar ..Applicant -VERSUS- The State of Maharashtra and another ..Respondents ..... Mr. N.P. Patil (Jamalpurkar), Advocate for applicant Mrs. R.K. Ladda, APP for respondents ..... (CORAM : SHRIHARI P. DAVARE,J.) DATE : 29th September, 2011. PER COURT : 1. Perused the investigation papers which were made available for inspection purpose and heard the learned counsel for the respective parties finally. 2. This is an application preferred by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest, in connection with C.R. No. 97/2011, registered at Udgir Rural Police Station, Dist. Latur, for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323, 420, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2 cri4059.11 3. It appears that the crime has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by complainant/victim namely; Shridevi Maroti Bhutale on 3rd July, 2011. On perusal of the contents of the said complaint, it appears that the main allegations are made against the accused no.1 namely Professor Datta Bansode and the allegations made against the applicant herein i.e. co-accused in the complaint are to the extent that he was associate of the said main accused namely Professor Datta Bansode and on 08.07.2011 he accompanied with Datta Bansode, came to Udgir and assured the complainant to provide job and house, and told her not to reside there and took her by vehicle of the applicant herein to Kamalnagar and hired the room on rent there from Vishwanath More and not beyond that. Moreover, it is also apparent that the prosecutrix was major even in the year 2007 since the allegations in the complaint are in respect of the year 2007 and the age of the complainant in the complaint is 21 years. Besides, although as per allegations in the F.I.R. the incident took place in the year 2007, the complaint came to be lodged by the 3 cri4059.11 prosecutrix in the year 2011 i.e. after almost delay of 4 years. 4. In the circumstances, having comprehensive view of the matter and considering the accusations made against the applicant and the nature and gravity thereof, apparently, there is no necessity of custodial interrogation of the applicant for further progress in the investigation, and therefore, the interim anticipatory bail granted in favour of the applicant by order dated 19th September, 2011 deserves to be made absolute, but on certain conditions. 5. In the result, the present application is allowed confirming the interim anticipatory bail granted in favour of the applicant on the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall give attendance before the concerned Investigator once in a week i.e. on every Tuesday between 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. till filing of the charge sheet and shall co-operate in the investigation. 4 cri4059.11 (iii) The applicant shall not influence upon the witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence, in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly. 6. However, it is made clear that the above observations are prima facie in nature, and same shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. 7. The present Criminal Application stands disposed of finally. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE) JUDGE ga s/cri4059.11