Kunal Nagnath Jalla v. The State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3321 OF 2025 Kunal Nagnath Jalla ...Applicant

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra and Anr.

...Respondents

----- Mr. Saurabh P. Tandale i/b Mr. Abdul Quadhir Auti, Advocate for the Applicant.

Ms. Priyanka S. Rane APP for the Respondent - State. Ms. Savita P. Shedbale a/w Ms. Priyanka Tawade for Respondent No. 2.

----- CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date:

2025.12.10 14:36:41 +0530 SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM DATE : 8th DECEMBER, 2025.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in connection with C.R. No. 403 of 2025 registered with Sadar Bazar Police Station, District: Solapur, for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 75, 78, 79, 126(2), 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, "BNS Act") and Sections 8 and 12 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, "POCSO Act").

2.

It is prosecution's case that the Applicant, along with coShantanu S. Dhudum 1/4

accused, outraged modesty of the minor daughter of the first informant. It is further alleged that the Applicant has captured photographs of the victim with co-accused and tried to hold her hand. 3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the Applicant is behind bar for more than seven months. The investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. The Applicant is a student and has no antecedents. It may take time to conclude the trial, and requested to allow the application. 4.

It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that at the time of incident the victim was 13 years and 2 months old. The co-accused and the Applicant outraged her modesty. Due to the said act, the victim has gone in depression and she is undergoing psychological treatment. If the Applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the prosecution witnesses and victim, and requested to reject the application. He relied on order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of X(Minor) Vs. The State of Jharkhand and Anr. in Criminal Appeal No. 263 of 2022 (SC).

5.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused F.I.R. and documents produced on record.

Shantanu S. Dhudum 2/4

6.

The allegations against the Applicant are that he took photographs of the victim with the co-accused and attempted to hold hand of the victim. The main allegations against the Accused No.1. The Applicant is behind bar for more than seven months. The Applicant is 23 years old and also he is a student as well as he has no antecedents. It may take time to conclude the trial. 7.

I have gone through the case law cited by the learned APP, the facts of the present case and cited case are different, hence not applicable.

8.

Considering these facts, I pass following order:

ORDER

i. Application is allowed.

ii. The Applicant be released on bail in connection with C.R. No.403 of 2025 registered with Sadar Bazar Police Station, District: Solapur, on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

iii. The Applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

iv. The Applicant shall not enter in the area where the Shantanu S. Dhudum 3/4

victim stays, till conclusion of the trial.

v. The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witness 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.) Shantanu S. Dhudum 4/4