1 appa 1319 of 2010 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1319 OF 2010 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.801 OF 2010 Imran Sayyad Yunush Sayyad .. Applicant. -versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr. P. G. Sarda, for the Applicant. Mr. Rajesh More, APP for the Respondent State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: 3rd August, 2011 P.C. 1. This is an application for bail by one Imran Sayyad, who has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solapur, for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 366, 385, 342, 452, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs.10,000/- or in default to suffer R.I. for 60 days. The applicant claims to have been in love with the victim since 2001. Victim, however, claimed that the applicant, took her on the pretext meeting to his sister, administered some drinks, making her unconscious and took her nude pictures, showed the same to her and thereafter demanded participation by her in sexual escapades on several occasions. The clippings of those episodes were taken. When the prosecutrix was to be married to one 2 appa 1319 of 2010 Jaykumar Govindram Nagdev, applicant threatened that he wants the prosecutrix to be married himself and he demanded Rs.5 lacs for deleting those clippings. This has been confirmed by the evidence of prosecutrix, her father as well as friend of father by name Chandulal Kukreja, who were examined at the trial. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the first video clipping was not before the Court and therefore, the very foundation of the case is shaky. He further submits that the applicant has been sentenced to suffer RI for 7 years and therefore, in view of the observations of the Supreme Court, in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai -vs- State of Gujarat, reported in 1999(4) SCC 421, the applicant should not be denied bail. He submits that the prosecutrix has already married and settled in her life and the applicant could be released by imposing suitable conditions directing him to keep himself away, considering the nature of allegations made and nature of evidence which has surfaced and that the applicant has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for a limited term of 7 years and that ordinarily in view of judgment in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai (supra), persons similarly situated have been admitted to bail, the applicant be admitted to bail. The applicant cannot be granted bail because the applicant himself used the nude clippings and also made a demand of sum of Rs.5 lacs from the victim's father for 3 appa 1319 of 2010 deleting those clippings. He had in the past created obstacles in the marriage of victim and therefore, there will be no guarantee that if released, applicant will not be upto same mischief. The application is, therefore rejected. Hearing of the appeal is expedited. (R. C. CHAVAN, J.)