BA-877-11.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.877 OF 2011 Arshad Husain Ali ... Applicant V/s. State of Maharashtra, Thru’ Gorai Police Station ... Respondent Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Sr. Advocate, i/b. Mr. Sushil Shuka and Mr. S.N. Rai, for the Applicant. Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, APP, for the Respondent. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 28 TH JUNE, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. I have gone through the F.I.R., the supplementary statement of the First Informant/victim and the other statements recorded during investigation. 3. The victim, who is of 20 years, is staying with her friend one Sunny Singh. On 2nd October, 2010, she had some quarrel with said Sunny Singh and, therefore, did not go out for her job. In the evening, she went out. At about 10:30 p.m. she went to one ‘Hookah Parlour’. There she met one woman by name Krutika and her friends. The Applicant is said to be one of them. It appears that she and the others, including the Applicant, danced in the said ‘Hookah Parlour’ for some time. Thereafter all of them had dinner together. That, thereafter at 4:30 a.m., they all left the said ‘Hookah Parlour’ and decided to go to Water Kingdom, had some BA-877-11.sxw 2 Dixit food in a Hotel and came to a Lodge at Manori, instead of going to Water Kingdom. As the rooms were not vacant, the victim, the Applicant and the others waited for about 2½ hours in the compound of the said Lodge. The Applicant then took the victim to another Lodge. The reason, which the victim herself gives in her statement, is that it was because of unavailability of a room in the first Lodge. The Applicant is alleged to have committed rape after going into the room of the Lodge. In the morning, the victim and the Applicant left the room and went to another Lodge where the others, (who had been introduced to the victim on the previous day), were present. The victim had some food in the Hotel and went to a Lodge at Manori along with the Applicant. The victim also appears to have gone to the house of the co-accused and taken the clothes of the said Krutika from that house. 4. The victim claims that she accompanied the Applicant even on the subsequent day and went with him to two different Lodges. It also appears that the victim, initially, made allegations of rape against the co-accused Dhananjay also, but, in her supplementary statement, she said that those allegations were made by mistake and that they were not true. 5. From the conduct and behaviour of the victim, as is reflected from the F.I.R. and her supplementary statement itself, I think it proper to release the Applicant on bail. 6. The Applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.50,000/-, with one surety in like amount, on the condition that he shall not contact, meet or approach the witnesses in this case, in any manner, whatsoever. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]