Karan Rajendra Chavhan v. The State Of Maharashtra

2025:BHC-AUG:1819

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 932 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1368 OF 2024 KARAN RAJENDRA CHAVHAN

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Dushing Sanjay B APP for Respondent-State : Mr. G. O. Wattamwar Advocate for Assist to PP : Adv. G. P. Darandale ...

CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

DATE : 22.01.2025 P.C. :

1] Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the advocate for assist to PP and the learned APP for the respondent-State.

2] The applicant is apprehending arrest in connection with FIR bearing No. I-651 of 2024, registered at Pathardi Police Station, Tq. Pathardi, Dist. Ahmednagar, for the offences punishable under sections 376(2)(n) and 506 of IPC.

3] This Court by order dated 14.08.2024 has granted interim protection to the applicant. In terms of the said order the applicant has attended the concerned Police Station and has co-operated with the investigation.

4] The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the allegation against the applicant is that he had sexual relations with the informant and he has broken away promise of marriage. The complaint itself indicates that the family members of the victim had arranged marriage with the applicant on 23.04.2024. Prima facie, it cannot be said that there is no intention to marry with the informant. 5] In view of above, interim protection granted by this Court dated 14.08.2024 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.

6] In the event, the applicant violates any of the conditions specified in this order, it shall be liable to be

cancelled.

7] 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.

8] The application stands disposed of.

[ARUN R. PEDNEKER] JUDGE PRW