Vitthal Satyavan Lokhande v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3368 OF 2025 Vitthal Satyavan Lokhande ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

.....

Mr. Darshansingh Rajpurohit a/w Mr. Changdev Shingade i/b Mr. Ritesh Thobde & Mr. Pushkraj Deshmukh for Applicant. Mr. P. P. Deokar, APP for the Respondent-State. Ms. Shruti P. Ghodake Advocate for Respondent No.2. appointed through Legal Aid Committee.

.....

CORAM

:

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

18th NOVEMBER, 2025 P.C.

1.

By this application, applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.280 of 2022 registered with Pandharpur City Police Station, District Solapur for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366(A), 376, 376(3), 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5(i), 6, 8 & 12 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2.

It is prosecution's case that on 18th April 2022 at around 7.00 p.m., the applicant took the victim with him on the ground of Digitally signed by SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR Date:

2025.11.20 10:47:55 +0530 SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR

medical checkup and assaulted on her face and by threatening her, sexually assaulted her.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for applicant that there is delay in lodging the complaint. On 18th April, 2022, there was no allegations of sexual assault. The medical report does not support the prosecution case. The applicant is behind bar around 3 years and eight months. There is no progress in trial. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that the applicant sexually assaulted the victim, who was 13 years & 6 months old at the time of incident. The applicant was identified by the victim in the Police Station. If applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the victim or prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application. 5.

I have heard both learned counsels, perused the FIR and documents produced on record. The applicant is behind bar for more than three years and eight months. There is no progress in trial. Initially the victim has not stated about sexual assault on her. The Medical report does not show about sexual assault. It may take time to conclude the trial. Considering these facts, his further detention is not required.

6.

In view of the above, I pass the following order :

ORDER

(i) Application is allowed;

(ii) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.280 of 2022 registered with Pandharpur City 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.

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the victim or prosecution witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

(iv) The applicant shall not enter into Pandharpur City till recording of evidence of the victim except attending the trial Court dates.

(v) Applicant shall attend the Trial Court dates, regularly.

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 uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

9.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. 10.

As the learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 appointed through legal-aid, professional Fees of Rs.10,000/- be paid to her. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)