..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2320 OF 2008 Shri Rashid Osman Shaikh. ..Applicant. Versus The State of Maharashtra. ..Respondent. .... Mr.Aabad H. H. Ponda, Adv. for the applicant. Mr.H.J.Dedia, APP, for State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 28th July, 2008. DATED : 28th July, 2008. DATED : 28th July, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicants and the learned APP for the State. 2. The applicants are seeking anticipatory bail in C.R.No.252 of 2008 of Bhosari police station. The said case is mainly under Sections 376 & 302 of IPC. 3. One Rani i.e. accused No.1 was employed with the applicant. Rani had left the employment of the applicant some time prior to the incident. The applicant requested Rani to get him a maid-servant. Hence Rani got the prosecutrix to Pune on 19.6.2008. The case of the prosecutrix is that the applicant committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. ..(2).. Thereafter she robbed Rs.71,000/- belonging to the applicant as well as the mobile phone of the applicant and she ran away. She gave the mobile phone to her friend Pramod and she gave the money to her brother. Thereafter Rani traced the prosecutrix Rani, poured kerosene on the prosecutrix and the husband of Rani, Rajesh Agarwal set the prosecutrix on fire. Thereafter the prosecutrix was admitted in the hospital and her statement was recorded. 4. The prosecutrix was aged 17 years at the time of the incident. Though the incident has occurred on 19.6.2008 the first statement of the prosecutrix came to be recorded on 26.6.2008. In the said statement she stated that Rani got her employed with the present applicant. That night when the applicant went to sleep, she robbed cash as well as mobile phone of the applicant. She gave the mobile phone to her friend Pramod and she gave the money to her brother. Thereafter Rani traced the prosecutrix. Rani poured kerosene on the prosecutrix and the husband of Rani, Rajesh Agarwal set the prosecutrix on fire. It is pertinent to note that in the first statement the prosecutrix has made no reference to ..(3).. the applicant commuting rape on her or any other act which was sexual in nature. However, in her second statement recorded on 28.6.2008 she has stated that on the day that she was employed with the applicant, the applicant made her to drink liquor against her will’ and thereafter he committed rape on her. In the morning, she robbed the mobile phone and cash of the applicant and ran away. In both the statements the prosecutrix had admitted that she has committed theft of the cash as well as mobile phone of the applicant. 5. Thus, it is seen that first in point of time, the prosecutrix has not implicated the applicant and it is only in her further statement she has implicated the applicant. No reason has been given by the prosecutrix as to why she did not implicate the applicant in her first statement. The prosecutrix has clearly admitted that she has committed robbery of the cash and mobile phone of the applicant. Looking to these facts, I find much merit in the submission that it appears that the applicant is falsely implicated by the prosecutrix as she was afraid that the applicant would lodge a complaint ..(4).. against her of theft. 7. Looking to the above facts, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. 8. In the event of arrest, the applicant - Shri Rashid Osman Shaikh to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties to make up the said amount. The applicant shall report to Bhosari police station as and when required, till conclusion of the trial. 9. Criminal Application is disposed of accordingly. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)