Xyz v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others
2025:BHC-AUG:9531
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 46 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 318 OF 2025 KARAN PUNDLIK JADHAV
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Applicant :
Mr. Harsh Kotecha h/f. Mr. S. S. Thombre APP for Respondent/State: Mr. N. B. Patil Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. Abhishek N. Deshpande h/f. Mr. Sanadkumar Shinde ...
WITH ...
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 977 OF 2025 IN ABA/318/2025 XYZ
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Applicant :
Mr. Abhishek N. Deshpande h/f. Mr. Sanadkumar Shinde APP for Respondent/State: Mr. N. B. Patil ...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
DATE : 01.04.2025 P.C. :
1] Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP for the respondent-State.
2] The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.0015/2025, registered at Umari Police Station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under Section 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 4, 8, 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) Act, 2012. 3] This court by order dated 28.02.2025 granted interim protection to the applicant noticing submissions and reasons at paras 3 and 4, as under:
"3] The allegation against the applicant is that the applicant had maintained physical relations on false promise to marry the informant. The informant at the relevant time of offence was of 17 years of age. On the basis of said allegation, the FIR is lodged against the present applicant. 4] Prima facie, the relation between the applicant and informant is consensual in nature. Considering this aspect of the matter, the applicant is granted interim protection in the following terms :-..."
4] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that pursuant to the interim order the applicnat has cooperated with the investigation.
5] Considering the allegation that the relations are maintained on false promise of marriage and the relations, prima facie, being consensual in nature, this court had granted interim protection to the applicant.
6] The learned APP submits that the informant has given 164 statement, which is in concurrence with the FIR. Perusal of the same would also indicate that the relations were maintained on the pretext of the marriage. 7] Prima facie, considering the consensual relations the interim protection would stand confirmed. 8] In view of the above, the interim protection granted by order dated 28.02.2025 stands confirmed, on the following terms:
i] The applicant shall attend the police station as and when required by the Investigating Officer. ii] The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner. He shall not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case.
iii] The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and also in the proceedings before the trial Court.
iv] The applicant shall not contact the informant or any of the relatives or interfere with the investigation.
9] In the event, the applicant violates any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be cancelled.
10] It is also clarified that the observations made in this order are limited to the disposal of the present anticipatory bail application and the trial Court shall proceed further in the matter without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.
11] The application stands disposed of.
12] Criminal Application No.977 of 2025 for assist to public prosecutor is also disposed of.
[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE marathe