GOVIND NEMINATH SHELKE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned senior counsel for the applicant, the learned A.P.P. for the respondents/State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2/victim .

(2.) The applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 174 of 2022 registered with Kannad ( Rural) Police Station, Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Ss. 376, 376(D), 354 354(A), 354(D), 452, 506 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Ss. 4,8, 12 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and under Sec. 3(1)(w)(i)(ii), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act 2015.

(3.) The learned senior counsel for the applicant has read over the statements of the relevant witnesses, the statement of the father and the field owner where on the alleged date of lodging of the report the victim was working. He also pointed out that the brother of the victim drunk with one of the co-accused and under the influence of the liquor he told that the persons named in the F.I.R were enjoying with the victim. He also referred to the medical examination report and would submit that the medical report does not support the allegations. That apart, the father even did not make complaint of sexual harassment to his daughter at the hands of the applicant. In view of the fact and the material collected by the prosecution he may be granted bail.