MANGESH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has made this application for bail in Crime No.288 of 2023 registered with Vasant Nagar police station, District Yavatmal.

(2.) Learned Advocate for the accused submits that charge-sheet was filed on 18/8/2023. Till date the charge has not been framed. The learned Advocate further submits that the accused has been falsely implicated in this case. The incident, as narrated, in the report did not occur. In order to buttress his submissions, the learned Advocate took me through the medical examination report of the victim. The learned Advocate pointed out that the medical officer has opined that there was no injury to the genitals of the victim. The learned Advocate submitted that considering the medical report further incarceration of the accused is not necessary. Learned Advocate submits that if this Court is inclined to grant the bail, the accused shall not enter Pusad town till completion of the trial except for attending the Court.

(3.) Learned APP submits that the opinion of the medical officer is provisional opinion. The final opinion is awaited. It is subject to analysis of biological samples. Learned APP further submits that the victim girl on the date of the first incident was 14 years of age. She was subjected to repetitive penetrative sexual assault. The victim girl is appearing for 10th standard examination and release of the accused on bail would severely affect mental condition and will ultimately damage her future.