1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2890 OF 2009 [1] Pintu Mangal Ratnaparkhi & [2] Shuddhodhan Hiraman Chunarkar VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or Directions Court's or Judge's Orders. And Registrar's Orders. Shri R.P. Joshi, advocate for applicant Shri D.B. Patel, A.P.P. for state CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE, J. DATED : 20th AUGUST, 2009. By this application, both the applicants are seeking grant of bail in Crime No. 141/2009 registered by Police Station, Ramnagar, Chandrapur, for the offences under section 341, 363, 366, 323, 376 read with section 34 I.P.C. It appears the case of the prosecution that one Yasmita, a girl aged about 17 years was studying in 9th standard at Gajanan Vidyalaya, Kavthi. She used to reside at Payali, Post Ahali, tahsil and district Chandrapur and was going to her school by bicycle. On 16.3.2009 at about 7.00 a.m. when she had reached in front of the Kirana Shop at Ahali, applicant no. 1 Pintu Mangaldas Ratnaparkhi and his friend Shuddhohadan 2 Chunarkar came by Auto rickshaw. Since they are neighbourers of the victim they were known to her. Both of them had accosted her on road and Pintu threatened her that if she does not accompany with him, she would be beaten. She was made to get down from the bicycle and was made to leave her cycle and seat in the auto. Her bicycle was taken by Pintu to the house of one Baviskar and then she was brought to the house of one Prakash Ratnaparkhi at Tukum. From that place Shuddhodhan had left for his village. After having stopped at Prakash Rathnaparkhi’s house for one hour, Pintu had taken her to the house of his relative - Shalini at Rayatwari and had tried to use force on her in the house and hence his relative - Shalini had abused Pintu and advised him to take victim back to her house. Victim was made to stay with Shalini during that night. On 17.3.2009 uncle of Pintu had also abused Pintu and advised him to take victim back to her house. Then victim was taken by walk, via forest when one Rakesh Ramteke who was coming on motorcycle had seen the victim, she tried to go along with said Rakesh Ramteke, but then she was assaulted by means of stick by Pintu and thereafter while victim was being taken to Payali, she was raped on the way. Victim was thereafter taken to the agricultural field belonging to Shuddhodhan – applicant no.2, where from father of victim who was searching for her, took her back to home. Victim had received injuries on her back and hands as there was assault by stick. She was referred for medical examination and she 3 lodged report with police regarding alleged rape and assault, as also kidnapping. Learned advocate for the applicant during the course of his arguments contended that, it is nothing but a love affair between the victim and applicant no.1, as it is alleged that victim had written a love letter addressed to Pintu and went willingly with him. This contention has been opposed by the learned A.P.P. on the ground that no such letter was seized during the course of investigation and that no specimen handwriting of the victim was taken, in order to find out whether such letter was written by victim. It is also contended that victim was not consenting party, otherwise, she would not have lodged complaint regarding kidnapping, rape and assault. Learned A.P.P. submitted that considering the age of victim of about 17 years, even the offence of kidnapping her with a view to compel her to enter into illicit intercourse is punishable under section 366 I.P.C. Learned A.P.P. has also contended that the applicant had forcibly taken the victim and raped her taking advantage of her minor age. I have heard learned counsel for parties, and perused police papers. It is borne out that victim was referred to medical examination and four injuries in the nature of contusion were observed which were on left thigh lateral aspect, upper right arm, left shoulder and upper back. Her local examination also disclosed that hymen was ruptured 4 which admitted to one finger easily & some laceration also noticed. Thus considering the serious nature of accusations as against applicant no.1 in kidnapping the victim, in order to compel her under the circumstances to enter into illicit intercourse and committing rape, he is not entitled for bail. Earlier also applicant no.1 had moved the learned Sessions court. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on 3.7.2009 by a reasoned order rejected the application for grant of bail by passing order in Misc. Criminal Application No.364 of 2009. Copy of the letter sought to be relied by the applicant no.1 Pintu, may be used by him as defence on merit of the trial. Circumstances which may be noted that complaint was filed by victim herself, wherein she had alleged that applicant no.1 had assaulted her by means of stick, four contusions wounds were found as indicated above, indicating evidence of assault as well as rape, as a result of her local examination & considering the possibility of applicant no.1 tampering with evidence, bail cannot be granted in faovur of applicant no.1. However, the accused no.2 as victim herself stated that he had left for his village, no active role such as assaulting victim was attributed, applicant no.2 who himself is a student of about 19 years, there is no active involvement enough to keep applicant no.2 Shuddhodhan behind bars pending hearing and disposal of the case. Therefore, I am inclined to grant bail in favour of applicant no.2 while rejecting the application filed by applicant no.1. However, stringent conditions will have to be imposed against applicant no.2 for grant of bail. Hence the order: 5 1. Bail application of applicant no.1 Pintu is rejected. 2. Bail application of applicant no.2 Shuddhodhan Chunarkar is allowed. He be released on bail on his furnishing PRB and surety of Rs.25000/- with one surety in the like amount with further condition that he shall attend trial on each date of hearing and shall not commit any offence while on bail. Further he shall not misuse the liberty in any manner by tampering with prosecution witnesses & shall keep informed the address and phone numbers, if any, to the investigating officer and the trial court. Needless to mention that the observations made above, are in prima facie view of the matter and same shall not influence the trial court, in any manner, while deciding the trial on merits. Application stands disposed of. Hamdastd granted. JUDGE S.M.Pande