{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.32 OF 2010 1. Somnath s/o Radhakishan Ghungarad, Age-19 years, Occ-Education R/o Nimgaon, Tq-Shirur Dist-Beed 2. Kalyan s/o Gangadhar Pawal, Age-30 years, Occ-Agril R/o Sirasmarg, Tq-Georai, Dist-Beed APPLICANTS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.Sachin Deshmukh, Advocate for applicants Mrs.Yogita M.Kshirsagar, APP for respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 13th January 2010 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicants have approached this Court for their release on bail in connection with CR No.202/2009 registered with Shivajinagar police station, Beed for an offence punishable u/s 376(G), 354, 323, 506 r/w 34 of the IPC. {2} 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants followed by the submissions of learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation carried out till today. 3. It appears that the said offence came to be registered on the complaint of one Manisha Ghule. It is alleged in the complaint that in the night of 4th December 2009, the victim was forcibly taken by three accused to a lodge where she was sexually ravished by them and when the 4th accused entered the room with an intention to commit rape, she raised alarm and when she tried to come out of the said room, the present applicants did not allow her to go out immediately. The applicants came to be arrested on 4th December itself and since then they are in jail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants has urged that the contents of the FIR and the material collected during investigation carried out till today, do not indicate that any active role is played by the present applicants in the alleged offence of sexual ravishment and other than the allegations that they did not allow the prosecutorix to go out immediately, there are no allegations against them and also in view of the fact that they are in custody since 04.12.2009, they be released on bail. 5. While opposing the application, it is urged by learned APP that the investigation is still in progress and this is an offence {3} of sexual ravishment and hence the application be rejected. 6. Admittedly, the applicants were not inside the room where the incident took place. Neither they have molested the prosecutorix nor have they harassed her sexually. The only allegations against the applicants are that they were present outside the room where the alleged incident took place and not opened the door at earlier point of time to allow the prosecutorix to go outside the room. Considering the allegations against the applicants and in view of the fact that they are in jail for more than 30 days, case is made out to enlarge the applicants on bail by imposing certain conditions. 7. In the result, application is allowed. Both the applicants be released on bail on their furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each and on executing PR bonds. The applicants are directed not to enter in village Georai, till the trial is over. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/A10/criapln32-10