Mahesh Arun Mane v. State Of Maharashtra

Harish

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2907 OF 2025 Mahesh Arun Mane ...Applicant

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra and Anr.

...Respondents

HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI by HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Date:

2025.10.10 20:02:25 +0530 ------- Mr. Abhijit D. Kulkarni for the Applicant.

Ms. P. S. Rane, APP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Manish Devkar, i/b Shankar Katkar for Respondent No. 2. ------- CORAM :

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

8th OCTOBER, 2025 P.C.:

1.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned APP for the respondent-State and learned counsel for respondent No. 2.

2.

Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 tendered the affidavit-in-reply. It is taken on record.

3.

By this application, applicant is seeking regular bail in crime No.320 of 2024 registered with Velapur Police Station, District Solapur for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 351(2), 351(3), 3(5), 137(2), 87 of Bharatiya Nyaya 1/4

Sanhita 2023, Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 67, and 67A for the Information Technology Act, 2000.

4.

It is prosecution's case that the applicant sexually assaulted the first informant on various occasions by threatening her.

5.

It is the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that there was love affair between the applicant and first informant and out of the love affair, there was physical relations between them with the consent of the first informant. At the time of incident, the first informant was more than 18 years old. He further submits that the applicant is student and is behind bar more than 7 months. Investigation is completed. Charge-sheet has been filed. Hence, requested to allow the application.

6.

It is contention of learned APP along with respondent no. 2 that the applicant had sexually assaulted the first informant by threatening her. The consent given by the respondent no. 2 was under threat. Applicant had sent the obscene videos of the first informant to her fiance. Due to the said act, the marriage of 2/4

first informant is broken. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the victim and prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.

7.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused the FIR and documents produced on record.

8.

It appears from the record that at the time of incident, the first informant was more than 18 years old and she had love affair with the applicant. Whether the consent given by her under the threat or willingly, is part of evidence. Applicant is behind bar more than 7 months. Investigation is completed. Charge-sheet has been filed. Applicant is a student. If he remains behind bar, his education life will be ruined. Considering these facts, further detention of applicant is not required and I pass following order:

ORDER

(i) Application is allowed.

(ii) The applicant be enlarged on bail in crime No.320 of 2024 registered with Velapur Police Station, District Solapur, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

3/4

(iii) The applicant shall attend the Court dates regularly.

(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

9.

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

10.

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. 11.

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

[SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.] 4/4