Roshan Ramchandra Saroj v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3237 OF 2024 VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL Date: 2026.02.13 15:56:50 +0530 Roshan Ramchandra Saroj
Versus
State Of Maharashtra and anr.
_________________________________________________________________ Ms.Sana Shaikh with Ms.Nisha Lakariya, Mr.Rupesh Ghodake, Mr.Vipul Ghate, Ms.Maya Updeshe and Mr.Pratik Thadani Advocate for Applicant. Ms.Sangeeta Phad, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr.Sumit Patil for Respondent No.2.
Mr.M.D. Shirke,PSI, Kharghar Police Station, Navi Mumbai present in Court.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM
: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 10th FEBRUARY, 2026.
P.C. :
1.
By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.368 of 2021, registered with Kharghar Police Station, Navi Mumbai under Sections 363, 376(2)(I), 366(a) of IPC, under section 3,4, 5, 6, 11 and 12 of POCSO Act.
2.
It is prosecution's case that the applicant kidnapped the minor daughter of the first informant and sexually assaulted her. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant there was love affair between the applicant and the first informant. At the time of incident, the victim was 15 years old, whereas the applicant was 20 years old. The victim went with applicant at various places but she did not make hue and
cry. The applicant is behind the bars for more than four years. There is no progress in the trial and requested to allow the bail application. 3.
It is the contention of the learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that the applicant was aware about the age of the victim. He kidnapped her and sexually harassed her. If the applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the victim and the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application. 4.
I have heard all the learned counsels, perused the charge-sheet and the documents produced on record. The trial has commenced. 12 witnesses are examined. At the time of incident, the victim was around 15 years of old and applicant was 20 years old. It appears that the victim travelled with the applicant at various placed but did not make hue and cry. The applicant is behind the bars for more than four years. He has no antecedent. Considering these facts, I pass the following order :
ORDER
(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.368 of 2021, registered with Kharghar Police Station, Navi Mumbai on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.
(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.
(iv) The applicant shall not enter in the area of Kharghar Police Station.
5.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.
6.
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.
7.
All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)