1 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR . CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.592 OF 2010. MR. GEETARAM S/O LAXMAN SHEWALE VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PSO P.S. WADI, NAGPUR. ______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Shri R. R. Vyas, Advocate for the applicant. Shri S. S. Doifode, APP for respondent State. Shri A. M. Dongaonkar Advocate to assist the prosecution. Coram : A.H. JOSHI, J. Date : 20h April, 2010. 1. This is an application for anticipatory bail 2. The applicant – accused is the Police Sub Inspector, working at Kolhapur. 3. It is alleged that :- (a) He came to Nagpur and stayed in the same building in one of the apartments/blocks occupied by another Police Sub Inspector Mr. Zamre, on the date of incident. (b) He used to make telephone call from the mobile hand sent of the complainant. 2 (c) On 3-2-2010 when she was practicing Yoga on the terrace of the building, suddenly the accused came from her behind, demanded sexual relationship and ultimate committed rape on her. (d) The complainant did not disclose the matter to anybody and remained under depression. (e) The husband of complainant who is also a Police Sub Inspector, enquired to her about the cause of depression and restless, and has then disclosed the incident of rape to him at 8.30 p.m. to 9.00 hours in the night on 14-3-2010. (f) She had to succumb to the rape and kept quite because the accused had threatened her to kill if the matter was disclosed to anybody. 4. This Court had called the papers. Affidavit opposing bail is filed by the Investigating Officer. This Court had directed the Supervising Officer, Asstt. Commissioner of Police to file affidavit, which too is filed. 5. Perused the affidavit and the case diary. 3 6. Record shows that the police have exerted a lot in locating the accused in order to arrest him. 7. It is also seen that the statement of the complainant, her husband and Mr. Zamre in whose place, the accused was staying on the date of incident and some persons residing in the vicinity have been recorded. 8. It is seen that the persons staying in the vicinity have no knowledge about the incident whatsoever. These statements do not disclose any circumstance leading to suspicion about the movements and activities or subsequent conduct of the accused on the day and time of the alleged incident. 9. The police have collected the cell phone record and it indicates that there is contact between Cell phone of the accused and that of the prosecutrix during the period January, February and even on 13 th and 14 th March 2010. 10. According to the applicant, the complaint of rape is false. Considering the inordinate delay in filing the complaint and the version of the victim recorded by the police, the accused applicant is 4 entitled for bail. According to the applicant, the version of the victim is unworthy of confidence. 11. Perusal of the case diary and the statement of the prosecutrix have revealed that she claims that she remained under shock and depress and disclosed the incident to her husband belatedly. 12. It is not disclose as to whether on the date of the incident and days following thereby she was equally under depressed and restlessness. 13. Nothing is brought on record to suggest that the accused has terrorizing antecedents and therefore, it was quite possible that the complainant remained horrified. 14. Accepting everything in the complaint as it stand, at this stage, creates a grave suspicion as to whether the incident is that of forcible act or by consent, if at all it be a fact. 15. In this background, this Court is satisfied that prima facie, the applicant may not be involved in the act of forcible sexual intercourse with the complainant. In this situation, the applicant is 5 entitled for protection as sought for. 16. In the event of arrest, the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond and solvent surety in a sum of Rs.15000/-. 17. The applicant shall attend the police station and the Investigating Officer between 9 a.m. to 1.30 p.m from 22-4-2010 to 30-4-2010 and thereafter as and when directed by the Investigating Officer. Judge |mule|