Moniket Alias Om Dada Bhosale v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3629 OF 2025 Moniket Alias Om Dada Bhosale ...Applicant

Versus

State Of Maharashtra and anr

...Respondents

Mr. S.A. Deshpande a/w Mr. C.N. Deshpande, Advocate for the Applicant Mr. Saklen Mujawar for Respondent No.2.

Mr. A. S. Shalgaonkar, APP for the Respondent-State.

CORAM

:

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

27th NOVEMBER, 2025.

IRESH MASHAL P.C.

Digitally signed by IRESH MASHAL Date:

2025.11.28 15:23:37 +0530 1.

By this application, applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R. No. 925/2024 registered with Karad City Police Station, District Satara for offences punishable under Sections 64(M), 96, 3(5) 137 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and under Sections, 9 and 10 of Child Marriage Act.

2.

It is the prosecution's case that minor daughter of the first informant was kidnapped by the applicant and sexually assaulted. 3.

It is contention of learned counsel for applicant that evidence of the victim is recorded before the Trial Court. There was

love affair between the applicant and victim. At the time of incident, victim was more than 17 years old. She herself had gone with the applicant. Applicant is behind bar for more than one year. Yet charge is not framed. It may take time to conclude the trial. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that applicant was aware about the age of the victim. In spite of that, he kidnapped her and sexually assaulted her. If applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the victim and prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.

5.

Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 tendered affidavit-inreply. It is taken on record. It is contention of learned counsel for respondent no. 2 that complaint was lodged against the applicant due to misunderstanding and no sexual assault was done by the applicant on the victim.

6.

I have heard all the learned counsel, perused F.I.R. and documents produced on record. It appears from the record that at the time of incident, victim was more than 17 years old. There is delay in lodging the complaint. Applicant is behind bar for more than one year, yet the charge is not framed. The applicant has no antecedents.

It may take time to conclude the trial.

7.

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. 925/2024 registered with Karad City Police Station, District Satara 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. 8.

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

9.

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.

10.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)