Ramesh Rajaram Salvi v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2186 OF 2024 Ramesh Rajaram Salvi ...
Applicant vs.
The State of Maharashtra and another ...
Respondents WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2382 OF 2024 Akshay Yashwant Kurane ...
Applicant vs.
The State of Maharashtra and another ...
Respondents Mr. Babu Singh a/w. Mr. Avdhesh Yadave and Mr. Vikashchandra Mishra for applicants in both applications.
Mr. Bapu V. Holambe-Patil, APP for respondent No.1-State in ABA/2186/24. Mr. Balraj B. Kulkarni, APP for respondent No.1-State in ABA/2382/24. Mr. Sangram B. Suryawanshi for respondent No.2 in both applications. CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J.
DATE :
22nd OCTOBER, 2024 P.C. :
.
In these applications, the applicants were granted interim relief by orders dated 23.08.2024 and 09.09.2024.
2.
Insofar as applicant in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2186 of 2024 viz. Ramesh Rajaram Salvi is concerned, this Court found that the only allegation against him was that his step-son i.e. the applicant in the other application, who was lover of the victim girl, had brought the girl to the 1/3 Digitally signed by PRIYA KAMBLI Date:
2024.10.22 18:21:45 +0530 PRIYA KAMBLI
house of the applicant.
3.
As regards Akshay Yashwant Kurane i.e. applicant in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2382 of 2024, while granting interim relief in his favour by order dated 09.09.2024, this Court, in paragraph No.6, observed as follows: "6.
This Court has carefully perused the statements given by the victim girl. Her statement recorded before the Magistrate under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. does contain one sentence, alleging that the applicant had threatened that he would kill her unless she agreed for marriage with him. But, the other part of the aforesaid statement of the victim indicates that she voluntarily joined the company of the applicant and she was with him for about six days at Tirupati, two days at Kolhapur and about 15 days in Konkan region, before eventually being found by the police. She specifically stated that she had gone with the applicant on her volition and that there was no physical relationship during the aforesaid period between the two. It is significant to note that the victim was 17 years and 3 months at the relevant time, indicating that she was on the verge of attaining majority and it can be said that she was aware of the consequences of her actions."
4.
The learned APP submitted that both the applicants appeared before the investigating officer and they co-operated with the investigation. 5.
Mr. Sangram B. Suryavanshi, Advocate was appointed by the High Court Legal Services Committee to appear on behalf of the victim in Anticipatory Bail Application No.2186 of 2024. This Court has heard him in the said application as well as in the accompanying application, as both the applications arise from the same FIR.
2/3
6.
As noted in the interim orders, there is not even an allegation about physical relationship between the applicant Akshay Yashwant Kurane and the victim, during the period when she was in his company. She specifically stated that she had gone with the said applicant on her own volition. She was 17 years and 3 months old at the relevant time, indicating that she was on the verge of attaining majority and she could be aware of the consequences of the same.
7.
In view of the above and in the light of the fact that the applicants have co-operated with the investigation, this Court is inclined to confirm the interim orders and allow the applications.
8.
In view of the above, the interim orders are confirmed and the applications are allowed, subject to the applicants continuing to co-operate with the investigation. They shall not tamper with the evidence of the prosecution in any manner. They shall also not influence the informant, witnesses and other persons concerned with the case. (MANISH PITALE, J) Priya Kambli 3/3