1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No.2157 of 2008 (Shri Dinkar s/o Shivshankar Fokmare v. The State of Maharashtra) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Shri R.M. Patwardhan, Advocate for Applicant. Smt. T.D. Khade, APP for Non-Applicant/State. CORAM : A.H. Joshi, J. DATE : 4th July, 2008 1. This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2. Crime No.50 of 2008 is registered on the complaint/statement of victim Ramabai recorded on 3-6-2008. The incident is of 28-5-2008 on which date the victim was brought to the hospital on account of injuries. Investigation papers indicate that the first dying declaration was recorded on 28-5-2008 in which she has complained that when she got humiliated due to demand of money by the accused, she has set herself on fire. In the further dying declaration dated 2-6-2008, she has disclosed the commission of rape by the accused. It is seen that as regards the allegations of rape, the medical report is silent, as the doctor examining the patient opined that it was not possible to give an opinion because the private parts of the patient had suffered injuries due to burn. 3. Only after the police recorded the statement on 3-6-2008, an 2 offence under Sections 376 and 448 of IPC is registered and after the death of victim Ramabai on 5-6-2008, offence under Section 306 of IPC has been added. 4. In oral submissions, the learned Advocate for the applicant placed emphasis on the fact that the grievance or complaint regarding committing rape was not made when the first dying declaration was recorded on the date of the incident, i.e. on 28-5-2008. According to the learned Advocate, the applicant has been falsely implicated, because there is enmity between the accused and the son of the deceased due to political reasons, as the applicant had participated in the election. He further urges that failure to make the complaint of serious incident itself is sufficient ground to distrust the allegations contained in the statement dated 2-6-2008 and FIR dated 3-6-2008. 5. This Court has perused the statements. The deceased has offered an explanation that due to fear of defamation of the family, she did not disclose the incident of rape in her earlier statement. 6. At this stage, there is nothing on record to suggest, barring for the reason that the complaint was made late, that the dying declaration dated 2-6-2008 as well as the statement on the basis of FIR was registered on 3-6-2008 should be discarded. In this background, prima facie, there is material against the applicant to involve in the commission of offence under Sections 376, 306 and 448 of IPC. The applicant is, therefore, not entitled to be released on bail. 3 7. The application is rejected. JUDGE Lanjewar