mpt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 306 of 2008 Bhusan Bantarrao Gholap .. Applicant versus State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ... Mr.Kuldeep S. Patil for the applicant. Mr.D.P.Adsule, APP for the State. CORAM : D.G.KARNIK, J DATED : 27th February 2008 P.C.: 1. Heard. 2. The applicant seeks bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with an offence registered at Shikrapur police station under C.R. No.153 of 2007, punishable u/s.376, 363 and 506 of the IPC. 3. The prosecution case is that on 11th September 2007, the applicant pulled and dragged Neelam (hereinafter referred to as ’the victim") and took her in a rickshaw at Pune station. He then took her in a jeep at Shreekrishna Lodge at Shikrapur under the pretext that her relatives were in the lodge. He then took the victim to a room in the lodge after registering their names in the lodge register. In the room in the lodge applicant had a forcible intercourse with her and then threatened her that he would kill her if she made a complaint. He then repeated the intercourse after about half an hour. 4. A medical examination of the victim was conducted immediately on the next day. Though the victim is an unmarried girl aged 16 years, the medical opinion states that she was habituated to sexual intercourse. No injuries were noted on the genitals but there was an evidence of recent history over the injury over face. 5. The medical opinion does not suggest of a recent forcible intercourse. On the other hand, the medical opinion is that the applicant is habituated to sexual intercourse. The fact that the victim went to a lodge with the applicant and did not complain when their names were registered in the lodging register is suggesting of her consent. 6. The applicant is in custody for more than five months since 13th September 2007. The trial is not likely to commence soon. Taking into consideration the facts of the case, the nature of the evidence which is suggestive of consent and the fact that the trial is not likely to commence soon in my view, the applicant is entitled to bail. Hence, I pass the following order:- O R D E R . The applicant be released on bail on personal bond of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties for the aggregate amount of Rs.20,000/- subject to the following conditions:- i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly give any threats or inducements to the prosecutrix or any of the prosecution witnesses ii) The applicant shall report to the concerned police station once a month between 1st and 5th day of British Calendar Month and shall attend the Court on every date fixed till the conclusion of the trial. (iii) The applicant shall not change his place of residence without prior intimation to the police and to the court. (D.G. KARNIK, J)