1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2400 OF 2009 Kasif Ashfak Mukadam .. Applicant. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondents. Mr.J.Shekhar i/b J.Shekhar & Co. for the applicant. Mr.S.S.Pednekar A.P.P. for the State. Coram: D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 23rd June, 2009 P.C. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The applicant is seeking bail in C.R.No.132 of 2009 of Goregaon Police Station, Mumbai. The crime has been registered against the applicant and another for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 376, 384 r/w 34 of IPC. 3. I have heard Mr.Shekhar, learned counsel for the applicant for sometime. He invited my attention to the complaint and submitted that there was a delay of nine months in making the allegations of rape on the present applicant. The first act of alleged rape was committed sometime in October 2008, the second was in November 2008, and thereafter in January and February 2009. It is true that the prosecutrix kept quite till she filed complaint on 2nd May, 2009. It is also true that the 2 applicant allegedly committed rape only in October 2008, and the subsequent acts of rape were by another accused, namely, Imtiaz Rokadia. The prosecutrix, however, in the last paragraph of the complaint has explained as to why she did not approach the police earlier or why she did not disclose commission of rape either to the police or her husband. Her explanation, prima facie, appears to be probable and satisfactory. It appears that nude photographs of the complainant were taken by the applicant and that he had kept her under constant threat that he would show the said photographs to her family members. The threats made the complainant to keep quite for long time. Keeping that in view and considering the manner in which the rape was committed by the applicant and his companion in October 2008, as stated by the complainant in the FIR, in my opinion, this is not a fit case to enlarge him on bail. Hence the application is rejected. While passing this order I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the trial Court shall deal with the case uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. Application is disposed of. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)