1 ba 605.19.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

Criminal Application (BA) No.605 of 2019

(Pradeep Sundarkar V State of Maharashtra thr PSO PS Desaiganj,

Dist Gadchiroli)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judges Order.

Coram, appearances, Court's Orders

or directions and Registrar's orders.

Shri A.C. Jaltare, Counsel for applicant.

Shri V.P. Maldhure, APP for State.

Coram : Manish Pitale, J.

Dated : 14th August, 2019.

The applicant has approached this Court as he was arrested

on 04-02-2019 in connection with FIR of the same date, whereby offences

under Sections 376(2)(n), 376(3) and 506 of the IPC as also Section 4 of

the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 were registered

against him.

2.

The complainant in the present case is the victim who claims

to be about 13 years of age. She approached the Police by submitting an

oral report on 04-02-2019 stating that on 01-02-2019, the applicant had

taken her to a segregated place and committed forcible sexual intercourse

with her. According to the complainant, the applicant had threatened her

and told her not to reveal the said incident to anybody and that after she

informed her family the said FIR was registered.

3.

Investigation was carried out by the Police and after

completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed on 02-04-2019.

2 ba 605.19.odt

4.

The learned Counsel for the applicant has invited attention to

the medical examination report of the victim which was carried out on

05-02-2019. In the hospital, as narrated by the complainant to the doctor, it

has been recorded that the incident in question was the third time when

there was sexual intercourse between applicant and the complainant. It

was recorded that on two previous occasions the applicant had sexual

intercourse with the complainant after the applicant had allegedly proposed

to the complainant. It was further highlighted by the learned Counsel for

the complainant that the medical report recorded that the hymen was

torn, but it was an old tear which had healed. At the time of medical

examination the complainant was found to be pregnant with the fetus

having gestation period of 6 weeks and 3 days. The fetus was aborted and

sample was collected for DNA analysis. The learned Counsel for the

applicant submitted that the aforesaid material on record was sufficient to

indicate that the story put forth by the complainant in oral report dated

04-02-2019 was not believable and that therefore, a case for grant of bail

was made out.

5.

The learned APP opposed the application by pointing out that

the offence registered against the applicant was a serious offence and that

the complainant was mere 13 years of age, thereby showing that even if

it was claimed that sexual intercourse had taken place by consent, it

would be of no consequence in the present case.

6.

A perusal of the medical examination report of the victim in the

present case does show that the history narrated by the complainant to the

3 ba 605.19.odt

doctor is at complete variance with the oral report submitted by her to the

Police, which led to registration of the FIR. The contents of the report also

show that there are no external injuries suffered by the victim on her body

and even tear in the hymen is found to be an old tear which had healed.

The manner in which the history was narrated by the complainant sho