X Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present application has been filed by original informant under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of bail granted to respondent No.3 in Miscellaneous Criminal Application (Bail) No.871 of 2019 by learned Additional Sessions Judge-2, Nanded on 14-10-2019. Respondent No.3-original accused was arrested in Crime No.362 of 2019 registered with Shivaji Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2) (N), 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code on the basis of the FIR lodged by the present applicant.

(2.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. Amit A. Mukhedkar for applicant, learned APP Mrs. R. P. Gaur for respondent Nos.1 and 2 - State and learned Senior Counsel Mr. R. S. Deshmukh instructed by learned Advocate Mr. Govind Kulkarni for respondent No.3 - State.

(3.) It has been vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that the learned Additional Sessions Judge did not take into consideration the facts properly and made unnecessary observations contrary to the interest of the applicant without there being any evidence at prima facie stage. The applicant is a married lady, however, there is dispute between her and her husband since January, 2017. Therefore, they are residing separately. The applicant is serving in primary health centre and in connection with her job, she became acquainted with the accused. In fact, he had helped the applicant in Court proceedings which she had taken up against her husband. After getting her confidence, he had invited her in his rented house on couple of occasions. In the month of September 2017, when she had gone to his house, he gave a juice (Sharbat) laced with sedatives to her. After drinking the said juice, taking disadvantage of the situation of the applicant, the accused has committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. In fact, she become pregnant from the accused and gave birth to a child. The accused has extracted amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from her by giving threats. So also, he has taken away her gold ornaments. She was also forced to give the custody of the child to the accused under the threat that they have connection with the police department and politicians. She was also forced to give her salary of two months to the accused. With such kind of torture, when the applicant collected courage to lodge the report against the accused persons, accused No.1 has been granted anticipatory bail without understanding the gravity of the offence. The observations that there appears to be consensual act and the applicant was cohabiting with accused as husband and wife, delay in lodging the report, are the observations which do not stand to the sentiments of the applicant.