Saurabh Rajesh Ingole v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2026:BHC-AUG:1570 :: 1 ::
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO.2481 OF 2025 Saurabh s/o Rajesh Ingole ... APPLICANT
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & anr.
... RESPONDENTS .......
Mr. D.A. Mane, Advocate with Mr. S.W. Khan, Advocate for applicant Mr. P.P. Dawalkar, A.P.P. for respondent No.1 - State Mr. A.S. Mirajgaonkar, Advocate for respondent No.2. .......
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 16th JANUARY, 2026 PER COURT :
1.
By this application, the applicant seeks his release on regular bail in connection with Crime No.498/2025, registered with Satara Police Station, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 75, 78, 79, 137(2), 115(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from sexaul Offences Act (for short POCSO Act).
:: 2 ::
2.
The prosecution case in short is that, the accused used to talk with the victim on mobile of the informant (father of the victim) and his wife. On 4/10/2025, their neighbour came to their house and and informed the mother of the victim that the applicant has made phone call to him and told that the victim was with him and he started abusing and threatening to kill the victim. The mother of the victim got scared and informed about the same to the informant. They made phone call to the applicant, but he was telling lie about his location.
3.
After taking search for the victim, noted victim at Beed Bypass Road. Upon inquiry, she disclosed that the applicant forcibly kidnapped her from her tuition class and took her on his motorcycle to a remote place and threatened her to be of him, otherwise he would not allow her to be of anybody, and outraged her modesty. When the victim resisted, the applicant pressed her throat and beaten her and thereafter dropped in front of a shop at Beed Bypass Road. Later, the informant and his family members made phone call to the applicant and asked him not to contact with the victim, but the applicant threatened to make her photographs viral on social media and used to call on the mobile phone of the informant, his wife and neighbourers and abused them. The
:: 3 ::
applicant used to follow the victim and searched her on social media.
4.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, in relation to the incident dated 4/10/2025, whereas the report is lodged on 21/11/2025 and thereafter the arrest of the applicant is effected on 24/11/2025. He further submits that, the applicant and the victim were in consensual relationship and the victim was aware fo the consequences. The applicant is the only earning member of the family. There is unexplained delay of 48 days in lodging the report. The investigation is complete. As such, prayed to allow the application.
5.
The learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for respondent No.2 vehemently opposed the application submitting that the victim is minor and the applicant has indulged in a serious crime. As such, not entitled for bail. The investigation is in progress and in the event the applicant is enlarged on bail, he may misuse his liberty so as to tamper with the prosecution evidence. As such, prayed to reject the application.
6.
I have heard the learned counsel for both the sides and perused the record. Prima facie there is unexplained delay of 48
:: 4 ::
days in lodging the report. Moreover, the victim appears to be in relationship with the applicant and there is also material match of the age of the applicant and the victim. Nevertheless, the victim accompanied to the applicant for considerable period prima facie indicates it is a case of false implication. The apprehension expressed by the learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for respondent No.2 can be taken care of by imposing stringent condition on the applicant. I am, therefore, persuaded to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant.
7.
Hence, the following order :
O R D E R
(i) Bail Application is allowed.
(ii) The applicant Saurabh Rajesh Ingole be released on bail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount in the above crime, on the conditions that :
(a) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner and shall not pressurize the victim and prosecution witnesses. Breach of the same would entail in cancellation of the bail.
:: 5 ::
(b) The applicant shall remain present on each date, unless exempted by the trial Court.
(iii) Needless to state that, the observations rendered herein shall be construed as an expression on the merits of this application only. The learned Trial Court shall proceed independently and uninfluenced by any observations made hereinabove. (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) fmp/-