IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1349 OF 2007 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1286 OF 2007. Santosh Ganpat Lamkhade ...... ...... Applicant. V/s State of Maharashtra .. ...... ......Respondent. Mr.V.C.Desai, Adv. For the applicant. Ms.Alpa J. Jahveri, APP For the respondent. CORAM: A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 16/2/08 PC: This application has been moved by the present appellant- accused for grant of bail. The applicant has been convicted by the Sessions Judge for the offence punishable under section 376 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years, pay fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further imprisonment for one year. The amount of fine is to be paid to the victim as and by way of compensation. 2. According to the prosecution the accused and the victim were having love affair and sometime in the third week of April, 2001 the applicant-accused called the victim at his residence when no one was at home and at that time committed rape of the victim. The deposition of the prosecutrix reveals that the accused and the victim had sex on number of occasions at different places including in a lodge. When the victim missed her periods she went to a 1 doctor and it was then revealed that she was have pregnancy of five months. Thereafter she approached the accused time and again asking him to marry her but in vain and hence ultimately a complaint was made to the police and an offence came to be registered against the accused. Prima facie perusal of the evidence of the prosecutrix does not reveal that she had extended her consent for sex on assurance given by the accused that he would marry her. No doubt at subsequent point of time the accused is said to have agreed for the marriage. Perused the judgment. Question that requires consideration in this appeal is as to whether was the prosecutrix a consenting party or otherwise. The point requires a thorough examination. The applicant was on bail during the trial and has not misused the liberty. He is in custody since the date of the judgment i.e. for a period of 4/5 months. The accused is younger than the victim by about eight months. Both were in the age group of 18 to 19 years when the act complained of was performed. Taking over all view of the facts and circumstances I am of the clear view that this is a fit case for releasing the accused- applicant on bail. Hence I directed that the applicant be released on bail on the same terms and conditions in which he was released during the trial, however on executing fresh bonds. The accused is directed to deposit fine amount of Rs.20,000/-. It is clarified that the said amount be paid over the victim as and by way of compensation as directed by the Sessions Judge. Application stands disposed of. 16.2.08 2