1 Cri.A.2105.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2105 OF 2011 Brahmanand S/o Bhaurao Kale R/o Yehlegaon (Tukaram) Ta. Kalamnuri, Dist.Hingoli. ..APPLICANT. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, ...RESPONDENT. ... Shri. G.R.Syed,Advocate for Applicant. Shri.N.H.Borade, A.P.P. for Respondent. ... CORAM: T.V.NALAWADE, J. DATE : 23RD JUNE, 2011. PER COURT : 1. This application is filed for anticipatory bail, in Crime No.39 of 2011, registered with Balapur Police Station, District Hingoli, for the offence punishable under sections 363 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. Papers of investigation are made available by APP. Both sides are heard. 2 Cri.A.2105.11 3. Complaint is given by father of the prosecutrix that after 11.30 p.m. on 19.04.2011 his daughter aged about 15 years was kidnapped from his house by one Sandeep who is neighbourer of the complainant. It is alleged that Sandeep and other persons had taken the prosecutrix out of the house of the complainant. The statement of prosecutrix discloses that in the night present applicant had come to her and he had taken her out of the house. He had given threat to her. The statement further shows that present applicant had arranged four wheeler to proceed for other place and he had paid Rs. 1800/- as fare of the vehicle. In this vehicle prosecutrix was taken away. Allegation is made by prosecutrix that Sandeep committed sexual intercourse with her in lodge. School leaving certificate of the prosecutirx shows that on the date of incident the age of prosecutrix was below 16 years. 4. Advocate for the applicant submitted that allegation of rape is against Sandeep and there was no active part of applicant in the incident. This submission is not acceptable There are statements of witnesses, which show that they had seen the present applicant with the prosecutrix. The girl of about 15 years age was taken out of the custody of her parents and there is also evidence of rape committed by main accused Sandeep. In view of this , it is not fit case for granting anticipatory bail. So, application stands 3 Cri.A.2105.11 rejected. No further interim relief. It is made clear that these observations are only for the present proceeding and they will not come in the way of trial Court while deciding the case. Sd/- [ T.V.NALAWADE, J.] MTK