B.R. Gavai, J.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent.

2. The petitioner/accused has approached this Court being aggrieved by the observation of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No. 102 of 2012, dated 19.12.2015, whereby it has been observed that the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt.

3. The petitioner in the year 2002 used to take tuition classes for M.P.S.C. The prosecutrix namely Vaishali Bapuraoji Sonkusare (PW-3) had joined the tuition classes of the petitioner in the month of January, 2007. At that time, the petitioner had passed U.P.S.C. examination. It was the case of the prosecutrix that though she was doing a Private Job, she was compelled by the petitioner to leave the said job. It was her further case that the accused had taken a room on rent for the prosecutrix and he committed sexual intercourse with her on various occasions. It is further case that, in the year 2008, the prosecutrix was selected in Police Force and was in the Training Institute. It is her further case that, even in the Training Institute, the petitioner used to visit and to have sexual intercourse with her. Out of the said relationship