Bombay High Court
Ajay Sukhadeo Shinde vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 November, 2016
Author: Sadhana S.Jadhav
Bench: Sadhana S.Jadhav
30.ba.2128.2016.doc
dik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2128 OF 2016
Ajay Sukhadeo Shinde ...Applicant
vs
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent
.....
Mr Ritesh Thobde for the Applicant
Mr Rajan Salvi, APP for the Respondent/State.
.....
CORAM : SMT SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.
25 NOVEMBER, 2016
P.C. :
Heard. This is an application under Section 439 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The applicant herein is
arrested on 24 June, 2016 in Crime Registration No. 255 of
2016 registered at Barshi Police Station. The investigation is
completed and charge-sheet is filed against the accused for the
offences punishable under Sections 376, 313, 511, 323, 504,
506 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code. It is the case of the prosecution
that on 23 June, 2016, one "X" lodged the report at the Police
Station alleging therein that she was studying in Shivaji College,
Barshi. She was staying in rented premises in the house of
Pratap Patil, according to whom she had met the present
applicant. She got acquainted with him. When she was going to
college, she used to lock her room and keep the keys just outside
the room. One day the applicant had entered into her room by
using the keys; that he had ravished her against her wish; that
Pg 1 of 3
::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2021 15:11:47 :::
30.ba.2128.2016.doc
he had sexual intercourse with her on many occasions and she
had got pregnancy. On 14.1.2016 she had undergone medical
termination of pregnancy. According to her, the applicant was
instigated by his parents also and on one occasion she had also
been ravished by the brother of the applicant. On the basis of
her report Crime Registration No.255 of 2016 is registered
against the applicant and all his family members for the offences
punishable under Sections 376, 313, 511, 323, 504, 506 r/w 34
of Indian Penal Code.
2 Upon perusal of papers of investigation, it appears
that the first informant was in love with the present applicant
and that they had sexual intercourse on various occasions. The
statement of owner of the room shows that they were living as
husband and wife in the rented room of Sahebrao Gaikwad from
11.12.2015 to 29.03.2016, after which they had left the said
room and were residing in the rented premises of Pratap Patil.
The medical history given by the complainant is that she knows
the accused since two years. They had sexual intercourse many
times. She had become pregnant in January 2016 for which she
had undergone medical termination of pregnancy.
3 During the course of investigation, the statement of
Dr. Shubhangi Kadam has been recorded and she has disclosed
to the Investigating Officer that on 14.1.2016 the first informant
had been to her hospital along with her present applicant. He
had posed himself as husband of the informant. They had signed
the consent terms as husband and wife and on 16.1.2016 she
Pg 2 of 3
::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2021 15:11:47 :::
30.ba.2128.2016.doc
had undergone medical termination of pregnancy of "X". It is
clear from the record that it was consensual sex. Learned
advocate for the applicant submits that the relations between
the present applicant and the first informant had gone sour, and
therefore, the first informant had lodged report. He has also
drawn attention to the consent forms signed by the first
informant in Pavan Hospital, Maternity and Nursing Home, of
Dr. Shubhangi Kadam which shows the name of the patient as
Ms "X" wife of Ajay Shinde. Taking into consideration, the
papers of investigation, medical reports, the statement of
witnesses and the submissions advances across the bar, this
Court is of the opinion that the applicant is to be enlarged on
bail. It is made clear that the observations are restricted to the
application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
and shall not be taken into consideration for the purpose of
quashing the F.I.R., discharge application or at the time of trial.
Hence, the order.
ORDER
1 The application is allowed; 2 The applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing his P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or more solvent local sureties in the like amount; 3 The application is disposed of accordingly.
( SMT SADHANA S.JADHAV, J. ) Pg 3 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 28/11/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 15/09/2021 15:11:47 :::