{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2140 OF 2010 Pawan @ Pravin S/o Manmath Swami, Age 19, Occu. Student, R/o Govlinagar, Latur, Tq. & Dist. Latur. APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mrs. S.S. Jadhav, Advocate for the applicant Mr. K.S. Patil, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 29th June 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present criminal application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.263/2009 registered with Gandhi Chowk Police Station, Latur for an offence punishable u/s 366,363,376(g),232,504, 506 r.w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, in which the applicant came to be arrested on 27/12/2009, and after completion of investigation charge sheet is filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Latur on 25/03/2010. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP. Perused the complaint and other papers of investigation. {2} 3. It appears that the said offence is registered on the complaint of one Bapurao Govindrao Lohar, father of prosecutrix by name Radha who eloped with one Santosh. It is alleged in the complaint that Santosh had love affair with Radha the daughter of complainant, and on 04/12/2009 Santosh and Radha eloped from Latur and went to Hyderabad, stayed in the room which is taken on rent belonging to one Shaikh Rashid. Thereafter, the applicant and his friend namely Bablu Ramesh Palkan returned back to latur. It appears that in between 24/12/2009 and 25/12/2009 the parents as well as the police came to know whereabouts of Santosh and Radha at Hyderabad. From where they were brought back to Latur on 26/12/2009, and then on 27/12/2009 statement of prosecutrix as well statement of father of prosecutrix was recorded. The said offence came to be registered against this applicant, Santosh and Bablu. 4. Initially, the applicant had approached this Court requesting to release him on bail, however, his attempt could not succeed. Therefore, after filing of the charge sheet, the applicant is before this Court, over again. 5. During the course of submissions across the bar, it is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that except the fact that the applicant has assisted the main accused Santosh to elope with Radha to Hyderabad on 04/12/2009 and to find out {3} accommodation and return back to Latur. No other over tact is attributed to the applicant. Though it is alleged that after accommodation was provided to Santosh and Radha she was sexually ravished by the applicant and Santosh, this allegation is not supported by the statement of the land lord recorded during the investigation on 31/12/2009. 6. On perusal of the statement of said land lord, it discloses that on 08/12/2009 when he was near Hotel Rajdhani at Hyderabad, he saw three boys and one girl in search of a room and on humanitarian ground that no body should take disadvantage of their non acquaintance , he gave his address and offered a room. Accordingly, at about 4.00 PM the present applicant along with Santosh, Radha and one Bablu had been there. Thereafter, at around 5.00 PM, other than Santosh and Radha remaining persons left the premises to arrange for funds to pay the rent of the room acquired and for their necessary requirement. Thereafter, they did not return back. The statement of land lord is material, as there is allegation of gang rape in the night about 10.30 PM, which is not supported by the statement of the land lord. 7. During the course of submissions, the learned A.P.P. accepted this position, as it is the matter of record. At this stage, one has to go through the record, as the record speaks for itself as it is. Other than this there is no incriminating evidence against the {4} applicant to prima facie implicate him in the offence. As now, the investigation is over and the prosecutrix is also married, there are no chances of tampering of the evidence of the prosecution. Hence, considering the period applicant has already under gone in custody, case is made out enlarge the applicant on bail. 8. In the result, the application is allowed. He be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 263/2009 on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- and on executing PR bond in the like amount. After release on bail the applicant not to contact with the prosecution witnesses particularly the prosecutrix and her father. Application stands disposed of accordingly. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] SDM* 2140.10 Cri.Appln.