RAHUL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
LAWS(BOM)-2020-7-73
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on July 23,2020

RAHUL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

VIBHA KANKANWADI,J. - (1.) Present application has been filed by applicant-accused for bail under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure.
(2.) Heard learned Advocate Shri Bachate for applicant and learned APP Mr. SG Sangale for Respondent-State.
(3.) It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that the informant-girl is cousin sister of present applicant, who is now married. The informant-girl says that the first act, that was committed by the applicant was, in the month of July 2018, but she has not lodged any report till 6.5.2020. There is no proper explanation for the belated FIR. Further, the contents of the FIR would show that the first act is alleged to have been done with force. However, thereafter several acts have been committed. But, it appears that it was either with consent or only statement is made that it was against her wish. Except the FIR, there is no other supporting evidence to her story and even the medical evidence does not categorically say that the present applicant had committed rape on the prosecutrix. The friends of the informant have only stated that sometimes the prosecutrix was not coming along with them, but she used to disclose that she had gone along with the applicant on his room. Therefore, on such kind of evidence, the applicant, whose physical custody is no longer required for the purpose of investigation, need not be kept behind the bars.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.