2012appln1904.10.odt 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1904 OF 2010. Dnyaneshwar Deorao Bhagat .. vs.. State of Mah. thr.P.S.O.P.S.Mohadi, Distt.Bhandara. ............................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ............................................................................................................................................................... Mr.C.V.Sakhare, Adv. for the applicant. Mr.P.V.Bhoyar, APP for the State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J. DATED : 20 th December, 2010. Heard Mr.C.V.Sakhare, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.Bhoyar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State. By the present application, the applicant is seeking his enlargement on bail. The report is lodged against the applicant by one Ku.Sunita Sindhimeshram. It is stated in the report that the applicant on 15/6/2010, finding the victim Sunita alone in the house at about 10 to 11 a.m., entered her house and she was subjected to sexual assault. It is also stated in the report that four months prior to the alleged incident the applicant has indulged in similar sort of the activities and ravished the prosecutrix/victim. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the report is nothing but a false case lodged against the applicant. He further submits that the prosecutrix has not raised any alarm or made any grievance and as such the story is suspicious. Learned counsel further submits that in view of such material, the applicant deserves to be released on bail. 2012appln1904.10.odt 2 Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the serious offence is committed by the applicant. The record was placed for my perusal by the learned A.P.P. The report states that the applicant had four months prior to this incident ravished the prosecutrix and extended threats of life because of which the prosecutrix kept mum and after gathering some courage she told incident to her brother and her brother asked about the incident to the applicant. Learned A.P.P. further submits that in the report it is stated by the victim that the applicant has extended threats of life to her. Learned APP further submits that this is a successive bail application of the applicant. The earlier application was rejected on the ground that the investigation was not complete. Learned APP further submits that in view the strong material against the applicant, the applicant is not entitled for his release on bail. He further submits that as it is already stated in the report that the applicant has extended threats of life, in that situation if the applicant is released on bail, there is every apprehension that the applicant may pressurize the prosecution witnesses. I find considerable merits in the submission of the learned A.P.P. The materials collected by the investigating agency also support the contentions of the learned AP.P. In the result, the application is rejected. JUDGE chute