Sangram Shashikant Deshmukh v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 744 OF 2025 Sangram Shashikant Deshmukh ...Applicant

Versus

State Of Maharashtra And Anr

...Respondents

Mr. Satyavrat Joshi a/w Mr. Yash Fadtare Advocate for the Applicant Dr. A. A. Takalkar APP for the State Mr. Maruti Sarkar i/b Mr. Datta Mane for respondent no. 2

CORAM

:

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

17th NOVEMBER, 2025.

P.C.

IRESH MASHAL 1.

By this application, applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R. by IRESH MASHAL Date:

2025.11.18 15:51:00 +0530 No. 357 of 2024 registered with Atpadi Police Station, District Sangli for offences punishable under Sections 64, 64(1),(M), 74, 96, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections, 4, 6, 8 and 12 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2.

It is the prosecution's case that on 10th August 2024, around 12.00 noon, applicant and co-accused forcefully taken away the minor daughter of the first informant in the car of the applicant and sexually assaulted her and it is alleged that applicant sexually assaulted her in the car by threatening to kill her family members. It

is alleged that the applicant took nude photos and video of her and by threatening that the said photos and videos will be made viral, he again sexually assaulted the victim on 11th August 2024 and 14th August 2024.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for applicant that there is delay in lodging the complaint. At the time of incident, victim was around 17 years old. Applicant is behind bar for more than 1 year and 2 months. Though charge is framed, there is no progress in trial. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that applicant sexually sexually assaulted the victim on three times by threatening her, taken her nude photographs by threatening her. If applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten victim and prosecution witnesses. Applicant has two antecedents. Hence, requested to reject the application.

5.

There is delay in lodging the complaint. At the time of incident, victim was around 17 years old. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed, applicant is behind bar for more than 1 year and 2 months. Though charge is framed, yet evidence is not started. It may take time to conclude the trial. 6.

In view of above, I pass following order:

O R D E R

I.

The Application is allowed.

II.

The Applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R. No. 357 of 2024 registered with Atpadi Police Station, District Sangli on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

III.

The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

IV.

The Applicant shall attend the Trial Court dates regularly. V.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.

VI.

It is made clear that the above observations are made only for the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. VII.

Applicant shall not enter Atpadi Taluka, till recording of prosecution witnesses, except attending Court dates. 7.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)