1 CRI.APPLN.NO.294/2010 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.294/2011 (Gangaram Yelappa Shankat Vs. The State of Maharashtra) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.NN Chitlange, Adv. for applicant; Mr.NB Patil, APP for State. *** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 31 st January, 2011. ... 1) Heard. 2) The applicant/accused seeks bail in the event of arrest in terms of Section 438 Cr.P.C. 3) The Counsel submits, the victim was major at the relevant time, as could be seen, supported by affidavits of few persons. The Birth Certificate of the victim dated 20th May, 1995 produced is not relied upon by the District Judge while entertaining the bail application of other accused in this matter. The Counsel, therefore, seeks exercise claiming that the accused/applicant will be available for DNA test or any other investigation purpose. 4) The birth certificate of the victim, in the form of Photostat copy was produced, 2 CRI.APPLN.NO.294/2010 it was not the stage to decide its worth. She having lodged a report after sustaining pregnancy and thereafter delivery of still born will not be a ground at this stage to exercise powers under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Primarily the victim appears to be a minor and any act with the minor would amount to sexual abuse or assault. Consequently, discretion in terms of Section 438 Cr. P.C. would not be available to exercise in favour of the applicant/accused. Application rejected. The observations are prima facie in nature. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/