1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1891 OF 2010 1. Vandana W/o.Parbhu Kadam, Age-49 years, Occu-Household, 2. Sonabai W/o.Prameshwar Kadam, Age-20 years, Occu-Household, Both R/o.Indira Nagar, Latur, Dist. Latur APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra Through Police Station Officer, Police Station, Gategaon, Taluka and Dist. Latur RESPONDENT Mr.V.P.Patil (Jamalpurkar), learned counsel for applicants. Mr.S.G.Nandedkar, learned APP for State CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J. DATE : 23/06/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicants have approached this Court for their release on bail in connection with CR No. 81/2009, registered in Gategaon Police Station, Dist. Latur, in which both the applicants were arrested on 26/10/2009, wherein after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed on 31/12/2009. 2 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned APP for State. Perused the papers of investigation till carried out. 3. Perusal of the papers of investigation discloses that the said offence came to be registered on 26/10/2009 on the complaint of one Sunita Kadam, mother of victim Shivkanya. Applicant no.1 is the wife of brother in law of Sunita, while applicant no.2 is the daughter in law of applicant no.1. Victim is the eldest daughter of Sunita Kadam. Her brother in law Prabhu is working in the field of one Chandu Patil. In the month of March 2009, this brother in law of the complainant had asked applicant no.2 to accompany him to arrange for his meals. Hence applicant no.2 requested complainant to allow Shivkanya to accompany her. Accordingly Shivkanya accompanied applicant no.2. It is alleged that one Ganesh Kadam was acquainted with applicant no.2. Applicant no.2 accepted some money from that Ganesh and forced Shivkanya to maintain sexual relationship forcibly with said Ganesh. It is alleged that due to this illicit relations, victim became pregnant. With the help of applicant no.1 and one Nangare Patil, the pregnancy was terminated. Somehow, the complainant came to know about these facts, hence she came at the place where these applicants and the victim were residing and took the victim back. 4. Offence was registered on the complaint of Sunita on 26/10/2009 and since then these applicants are in the custody. 3 5. Perusal of the statement of prosecutrix Shivkanya, who is victim in this case, alleged that she was forced to keep illicit relation with Ganesh, who is also one of the accused in this CR, at the instigation of applicant no.2. Considering the papers of investigation, the role played by the first applicant relates to termination of pregnancy as per the statement of the prosecutrix, but the role played by applicant no.2 is of serious nature, because she has taken dis-advantage of the helpless victim and forced her to keep illicit relations with said Ganesh. In the premise, overall effect, case of applicant no.1 can be considered for bail, while no case is made out in respect of applicant no.2. Hence order : O R D E R 1. Application is partly allowed. 2. Application of applicant no.1 is hereby allowed. She be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. 3. Application of applicant no.2 for bail is hereby rejected. 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/JUNE 2010/cri-appl-1891-10