1 crap3617.11 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3617 OF 2011 _________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _________________________________________________________________________________ Shri J.N.Ghuge, advocate for the applicant Shri B.V.Wagh, A.P.P. for respondent nos.1 and 2 ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 6 th September, 2011. PER COURT :- 1 Perused the investigation papers which were made available for perusal purpose and heard respective learned counsel for the parties finally. 2 This is an application preferred by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest under C.R. No. 65 of 2011, registered at 2 crap3617.11 Aundha (N) police station, District Hingoli, for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376, 417, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3 It appears that the offence has been registered on the basis of the complaint lodged by Sunita Ramgir Giri on 29.7.2011, alleging that although the complainant has been already married, the applicant gave false promise to her that he would marry with her and induced her and abducted her from Aurangabad with the help of the co-accused and took her to Nanded and Hingoli and committed rape upon her and out of the said physical relations, one daughter, namely Prajakta was born and the applicant herein allegedly gave threats to the complainant to kill her. 4 The contents of the complaint filed by the complainant Sunita are self-explicit, which disclose that the complainant was knowing the applicant since 1999 prior to her marriage. Even after her 3 crap3617.11 marriage, apparently she continued her love affair with the applicant, and therefore, her husband gave divorce to her and has been residing along with the son Saurabh and the said complaint discloses that the complainant resided with the applicant at different places, such as Vishnunagar, Nanded; Hingoli by-pass, during the period from 2005 to 2011, and hence, apparently, possibility of consensual intercourse between both of them cannot be ruled out. 5 Besides, as regards the question of paternity of girl Prajakta raised by learned A.P.P., the applicant has produced the birth certificate of the said girl Prajakta (page 37), which discloses father's name as Rahul i.e. applicant herein, and hence, apparently, the said aspect does not require any more consideration at least at this stage, and further it does not warrant the custodial interrogation of the applicant. 4 crap3617.11 6 Having the comprehensive view of the matter and considering the accusations made against the applicant, apparently I am of the view that there is no necessity of custody of the applicant for further progress in the investigation, and hence, interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant deserves to be made absolute. 7 In the result, present application is allowed and interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant on 23.8.2011 stands confirmed on the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall give attendance before the concerned investigator once in a week i.e. on Saturday between 5.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m., till filing of the charge sheet and shall cooperate in the investigation. (ii) The applicant shall not influence upon the witnesses and/or tamper with the evidence, in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly. 5 crap3617.11 (iii) The breach of the above conditions, shall entail cancellation of afore said pre-arrest bail. 8 The present application stands disposed of finally. 9 The above observations are prima facie in nature and shall be restricted to this order only and shall not be used in any other matter while deciding it on merits. 10 Parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order duly certified by the Court Sheristedar. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crap3617.11