1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUD ICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 149 /2010 [Balu @ Dayanand s/o Prataprao Deshmukh vs. State of Maharashtra ) ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr D G Patil Adv. for applicant Mr C N Adgokar APP for Respondent .......... CORAM : A.P.BHANGALE, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 1, 2010. Heard. 2. The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No. 1/2010 reported at Pophali Police Station Dist.Yavatmal on 3.1.2010 for offence punishable under section 376 read with section 363 and 366 IPC read further with sections 3 (1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities ) Act, 1989. The accusations prima facie appear to be serious inasmuch as it is alleged that the victim girl is a minor, belongs to one of the Scheduled Castes. The applicant had earlier approached the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Pusad who, by order dated 20.1.2010 rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail. In such cases investigation has to be undertaken as fast as possible as there is likelihood of screening of the evidence, if not zeroed in on the accused earlier. Considering the accusations as also requirement by the Investigating Officer to investigate into the serious 2 accusations as also possibility of long sentence of imprisonment, anticipatory bail can not be granted. Hence I am not inclined to take a different view of the matter than that taken by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Pusad. Application is rejected. JUDGE sahare