Kantu Sharanappa Chalawadi v. The State Of Maharashtra
Harish
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3350 OF 2025 Kantu Sharanappa Chalawadi ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr.
...Respondents
HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI by HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Date:
2025.10.01 17:30:05 +0530 ------- Mr. Pratik P. Jadhav a/w Mr. Muralidhar P. Kharat for the Applicant.
Adv. P. S. Alange for Respondent No. 2.
Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State. ------- CORAM :
SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE :
30th SEPTEMBER, 2025 P.C.:
1.
By this application, applicant is seeking bail in Crime No.508 of 2024 registered with Mangalvedha Police Station, Solapur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2.
It is prosecution's case that the applicant sexually assaulted the victim on several occasions on the promise of marriage. At the time of incident the victim was 17 years and 7 months old.
3.
It is the contention of learned counsel for the applicant 1/4
that the victim herself had called the applicant and want to meet him. There was love affaire between the applicant and victim. The relations between the applicant and victim were consensual. At the time of incident the application was 24 years old. He has no antecedents. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. It may take time to conclude the trial. Hence, requested to allow the application. 4.
It is contention of learned APP along with Respondent No. 2 that the applicant has forcefully sexually assaulted the victim for five times. The medical report supports the case of prosecution. If the applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the victim and prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.
5.
I have heard all the learned counsel, perused the FIR and documents produced on record.
6.
It appears from the record that investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. Applicant is behind bar more than one year. Yet charge is not framed. At the time of incident the victim was more than 17 years and 7 months old. It appears from the record that she herself had gone to meet the applicant. 2/4
The applicant was 24 years old at the time of incident. It may take time to conclude the trial. 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.508 of 2024 registered with Mangalvedha Police Station, Solapur Rural on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(ii) 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.
7.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.
8.
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 3/4
uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. 9.
All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
[SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.] 4/4