BA-841-11.sxw 1 Dixit IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.841 OF 2011 Santosh Dayashankar Yadav ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra, Thru' Kurar Police Station ... Respondent Mr. R.V. Gupta, i/b. Mr. Amarjeet Yadav, for the Applicant. Mr. J.P. Kharge, APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM:- A.M. THIPSAY, J. DATED :- 12 TH JULY, 2011. P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. The Investigating Officer is absent. The learned APP for the Respondent seeks time to secure the presence of the Investigating Officer. Since the annexures to the Bail Application are sufficient to understand the nature of the case of the prosecution against the Applicant, the prayer is rejected. 3. The Applicant was arrested on 6th February, 2011 on the allegation that he has committed offences punishable under Sections 363 IPC, 366A IPC and 376 of the IPC. The investigation is over and Charge-Sheet has been filed. The Applicant continues to be in custody till today. 4. A reading of the F.I.R., the statements recorded during investigation, including the statement of the victim herself, makes it clear that the victim herself left with the Applicant relying on the representation of the Applicant that he was in love with her, and that he would not be able to live without her. It appears that the Applicant and victim stayed together for about a month and during this period they kept sexual relations. BA-841-11.sxw 2 Dixit 5. Admittedly, the victim is not below 16 years of age. Though the victim has stated in her statement that she did not consent for the sexual intercourse, the fact that she had knowingly left with the Applicant and had been staying with him requires to be considered. Moreover, the objection, if any, of the victim with respect to the physical relations seems to be only that such relations should not be kept before marriage. The victim also appears to have informed her parents on telephone, after she had eloped with the Applicant, that she was well and safe. 6. Considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, including the nature of material on the basis of which the charge of an offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC is levelled, I am inclined to release the Applicant on bail, subject to certain conditions. 7. When an apprehension was expressed by the learned APP that the Applicant and the victim, being the residents of the same locality, there was a possibility of the Applicant tampering with the witnesses, if released on bail, Mr. Gupta submitted that the Applicant is ready to give an undertaking to the effect that he will not reside at or enter the said locality till the disposal of the case against him. 8. Under the circumstances, the Bail Application is allowed. 9. The Applicant is ordered to be released on bail in the sum of Rs.30,000/-, with one surety in like amount, or two sureties in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each, on the condition that he shall not enter the area within the jurisdiction of Kurar Police Station till the disposal of the case against him. [A.M. THIPSAY, J.]