1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.800 OF 2010 Mandakini W/o.Anil Bhavsar, Age-51 years, Occu-Service, R/o.C/o.Govt Girls Tribal Hostel, Raver, Dist. Jalgaon APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, Through : The Police Inspector of Raver Police Station, Tq.Raver, Dist. Jalgaon RESPONDENT Mr.S.D.Joshi, learned counsel for applicant. Mr.N.R.Shaikh, learned APP for respondent State. (CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.) DATE : 05/03/2010 PER COURT : 1. By the present application, the applicant has approached this Court for her release on anticipatory bail, in the event of her arrest in connection with CR No.16/2010, for the offence registered in Raver Police Station for the alleged offence punishable u/s. 376(b)(g), 506 r/w. 34 of IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant followed by the submissions of learned APP for State. Perusal of papers of investigation discloses that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of one Parli 2 Pyarsing Bhilala, who was taking education and was residing in the Ashram School at Mangrool. According to the statement in the complaint, in the month of December 2009, the present applicant, who was working as a Rector of that hostel/ashram school, called the complainant, where two persons were found present in the office of applicant. Applicant forced the complainant to have sex with those persons and accordingly she went outside that room and closed the room. Those two persons sexually ravished the complainant there. Thereafter, as the MC of the complainant was stopped for a 4 months period, she went to her native place in Madhya Pradesh by the end of Jan.2010 and disclosed this fact to her maternal uncle. It is further alleged that on 5 and 6th of Feb.2010, this applicant went to the residential premises of the maternal uncle of the complainant in Madhya Pradesh State and advised complainant to abort the pregnancy and also threatened not to disclose her name and the incident occurred in the hostel. In the said premise, complaint came to be lodged in the month of Feb. 2010, in which the present applicant claims the bail mainly on two grounds that the complaint is a delayed complaint and secondly now the applicant is admitted in the hospital as she has sustained paralytic attack. 3. Learned APP opposed the application on the ground that unless the applicant is made available for custodial interrogation, those two persons can not be apprehended as those two persons are in acquaintance with applicant only. 4. Considering these submissions across the bar, as well as the 3 papers of investigation shows that at the time of lodging of the complaint, and at present complainant was pregnant and carrying pregnancy. From the disclosure of facts, those persons sexually ravished the complainant, were not only the persons with whom the complainant came in physical contact, but she is in physical contact with her friend also. A case of rape can not be registered against the female. At the most, the offence attributed to the present applicant is that she has forced the complainant to have sex with somebody else, which can not be covered u/s. 376(b)(g) of The IPC. But in usual course, this is not a fit case, where the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail, but considering the physical condition of the applicant, on humanitarian ground, application deserves following order : O R D E R 1. Application is allowed. 2. In the event of arrest of applicant in connection with CR No. 16/2010, registered in Raver Police Station, 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. This protection is granted till filing of the charge sheet. 4. It is hereby made clear that even though the order of anticipatory bail is passed, investigation agency is not prohibited to interrogate the applicant in hospital, whenever required, but with consultation with medical officer that the applicant is in a position to face the interrogation. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) khs/MAR 2010/cri-appl-800-10