1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application (ABA) No.364/2011 ( Arvind S/o Bhaurao Karekar ..Vs.. State of Maharashtra, through P.S.O. Korpana, Tah. Korpana, Distt. Chandrapur ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Courts orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Mr. A.S. Kilor, Adv. for applicant. Mr. S.S. Doifode, A.P.P. for State/respondent. CORAM : M.N. GILANI, J. DATED : 11.11.2011. 1. This is an application under section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking directions for releasing the applicant/accused on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.56/2011, registered with the police station Korpana, Distt. Chandrapur, under section 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3(1) (xii) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. It is the prosecution case that one Vrunda Gedam who belongs to caste Pardhan – Schedule Tribe resides in village Kukudbodi with her husband and works as an agricultural labour. On 3/10/2011, she and other labourers had been to the field of accused for weeding operation. After working for some time, she went to answer the call of nature to nearby brooklet. At that time, the accused came from behind and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her. On the next day i.e. on 4/10/2011 at 7 p.m. she divulged this incident to her husband. On 5/10/2011 she and 2 her husband approached the police and lodged report. Normally, in the offence of like nature, discretion of releasing the accused on anticipatory bail is not exercised. However, here are few broad circumstances enumerated herein-below, which according to me, are relevant and decisive in allowing this application. The prosecutrix is young married lady aged 22 years. At the place where incident occurred, she was not alone. One Barikrao, his wife Anita and one Sudhakar Atram were present. The time was 11 a.m. To answer nature's call the prosecutrix went to nearby brooklet and at that time it is alleged that the applicant/accused came from behind and raped her. Since entire day was left for work, she made herself busy in weeding operation along with Anita and others. She did not divulge anything to Anita. The statement of Anita does not show that when the prosecutrix returned after answering the nature's call, she was seen in frightened state or anything unusual was noticed. The matter does not end here. In the evening the prosecutrix and other labourers returned to their residence. There also she did not disclose this incident either to her husband or to anybody. On the next day i.e. on 4/10/2011 for a whole day she kept mum. On 5/10/2011 she lodged report. No injury all over the body of the prosecutrix was noticed. A bare perusal of the F.I.R. reveals that absolutely there was no resistance from her. 3. In the light of above circumstances contention of learned counsel for the accused/applicant that this report was lodged at the behest of the husband of the prosecutrix as he was suspecting that the prosecutrix was maintaining illicit relations with the accused sounds probable. Under these 3 peculiar circumstances of the case, it is directed that in the event of arrest of the applicant/accused in Crime No.56/2011 registered with Korpana police station under section 376, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, he be released on bail on his furnishing PR. bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties in the like amount with condition that the applicant/accused shall attend the police station daily in between 10 to 2 p.m. till the submission of the chargesheet. JUDGE Tambaskar.