1 cr-appa-587-10 jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI.APPLN. NO. 587 OF 2010 IN CRI. APPEAL NO. 330 OF 2010 IN SESSIONS CASE NO. 90 OF 2009 Ajit Narayan Singh ..Appellant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ..Respondent .... Mr. Khan Abdul Wahab Adv. for applicant-appellant Mr. V.B.Konde-Deshmukh APP for State .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : OCTOBER 28, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned advocate for the applicant-appellant and the learned APP for the State. 2 By judgment and order dated 10.12.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nashik in Sessions Case No. 90 of 2009, the applicant has been convicted under Section 376 of IPC and sentenced to RI for ten years. The applicant is now seeking bail. 2 cr-appa-587-10 3 The prosecution case is that the applicant has committed rape on PW 5 who was about ten years old at the time of the incident. The evidence of the prosecutrix as well as her mother and medical evidence clearly connects the applicant with the crime of rape on a minor girl. 4 The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that there is inordinate delay in recording the statement of the prosecutrix and he submitted that this delay raises doubt in the mind regarding the veracity of the prosecution case. As far as this contention is concerned, it is seen that the incident occurred in the night of 5.3.2009 and FIR was lodged by PW 1 the mother of the prosecutrix on 6.3.2009 i.e. on the very next day. In the FIR, the name of the applicant is mentioned as the person who has committed rape on the daughter of the complainant. The complainant has clearly stated that she found her daughter crying. When she questioned her, her daughter revealed the act done by the accused i.e. rape was committed on her by the applicant. It is noticed that on 6.3.2009 itself the prosecutrix was referred to the District Hospital Nashik for examination. In the medical examination also, the history mentioned is that of sexual intercourse on 5.3.2009 at about 7 p.m. The medical report clearly supports the case of the prosecution that rape was committed on the prosecutrix. Even though there is delay in recording 3 cr-appa-587-10 the statement of the prosecutrix, it is noticed that the prosecution furnished some explanation for the delay. On going through the said explanation, it is found that a very reasonable and plausible explanation has been furnished for the delay in recording the statement of the prosecutrix. 5 Looking to the evidence on record, this is not a fit case to grant bail. Application is rejected. [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]