Dnyaneshwar Narayan Dahale v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2025:BHC-AUG:12571 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 615 OF 2025 Dnyaneshwar Narayan Dahale Age 45 years, Occupation Business, R/o. Vadigodri, Taluka Ambad, District Jalna.
At present Janki Nagar, Pimpargavhan Road, Beed, Taluka and District Beed.
... Applicant
Versus
1.
The State of Maharashtra Through Officer In-Charge, Police Station, Beed (City), District Beed.
2.
The Superintendent of Police, Beed, District Beed.
... Respondents .....
Mr. Sudarshan J. Salunke, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs. Vaishali S. Chaudhari, APP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2-State. .....
CORAM :
ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
Reserved on : 29.04.2025 Pronounced on : 30.04.2025 ORDER :
1.
Applicant seeks grant of regular bail on account of his arrest in crime no.0034 of 2025 registered at Beed (City) Police Station, District Beed for offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 69, 352, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
-22.
Learned counsel pointed out that there is false implication of maintaining physical relations on promise of marriage. That, infact informant is already married and had children and therefore, there is no question of false assurance of marriage. That, both applicant and informant are adults. That, relations are long standing and consensual. That, FIR is lodged on 26-02-2025 out of annoyance. That, there were no threats. That, though allegations are of forcible sexual relations, infact the same were consensual. That, in view of nature of allegations, no further recovery or discovery is to be made. That, applicant is behind bars since March, 2025. That, investigation is also over and mere formality of filing chargesheet is remained. As applicant is ready to abide by all and any condition imposed by this Court, he urges for grant of bail.
3.
Learned APP opposed application on the ground that there are serious allegations of forcible sexual relations on the false promise of marriage. That, subsequently, there were sexual relations by issuing threats. That, due to repeated threats, Non-Cognizable Cases have been filed. As investigation is still incomplete, learned APP opposes relief.
4.
Heard. Perused the FIR dated 26-02-2025. Informant has
-3reported that she resides with 17 years old son and 15 years old daughter and she has separated from her husband. She claims to be a social worker fighting for the cause of women. She claims that, 13 years back, she came in contact with present applicant and he allegedly visited her and offered to marry her and after the children went to school, he demanded physical relations. According to her, inspite of her demands to marry first, he on assurance to marry, had kept repeated forcible relations with her. Finally, on 22-01-2025, she alleges that he had forcible relations with her and when she insisted for marriage, he allegedly beat her and flatly refused to perform marriage. Hence, the report.
5.
Prima facie as pointed out, it is emerging that informant, a married lady, having grown up children, claims to have initially got acquainted with applicant and since 13 years, she claims that on assurance of marriage, he maintained repeated physical contacts with her. Only on refusal to marry, FIR has been lodged and there are allegations of threats.
6.
In view of above, considering the age and married status of informant, there is blend of long acquaintance and physical relations since long. Apprehension of threat and misuse of liberty can be taken
-4care of by imposing conditions. Hence, following order is passed :
ORDER
I.
The application is allowed.
II.
Applicant be released on bail in connection with Crime No.0034 of 2025 registered at Beed (City) Police Station, District Beed, on executing Personal Bond of Rs. 15,000/- with one surety in the like amount, on the following conditions:
[a] The applicant shall not tamper prosecution evidence. [b] The applicant shall not enter the vicinity where informant, her family resides, till conclusion of trial.
[ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.] SPT