Ajinkya Annasaheb Zarhad v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2026:BHC-AUG:16852 1 PB-1.ABA-1918-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1918 OF 2025 AJINKYA ANNASAHEB ZARHAD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr. P. M. Nagargoje APP for Respondents/State : Mr. P. D. Patil Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mrs. Ashwini Patil (Appointed) ...

CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.

DATE : 17th APRIL 2026 PER COURT :

1.

Not on board. Mentioned. Taken on board.

2.

Heard the learned Counsel Mr. Nagargoje for the Applicant, learned appointed Counsel Mrs. Patil and the learned APP Mr. Patil for the Respondent/State.

3.

The Applicant has approached this Court, seeking anticipatory bail application in connection with Crime No. 836/2025 registered with Kotwali Police Station, District Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 115(2), 351(2), 324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

4.

The case of the prosecution is that the complainant 'MBV',

2 PB-1.ABA-1918-2025.doc aged about 27 years, is the victim herself. On 23.12.2023, the victim met the applicant/accused, Ajinkya Annasaheb Jarhad, through Jeevansathi.com. After connecting and communicating, the applicant/accused allegedly lured her to the Radiance Hotel in March/April 2024, where, under the false promise of marriage, he forcibly established physical relations with her against her will. Thereafter, he repeatedly coerced her into sexual relations at various lodges in Pune and Ahilyanagar by threatening to circulate her photos and videos. Furthermore, he actively interfered with and disrupted two of her subsequent marriage alliances by contacting the prospective grooms. When confronted, the applicant/accused allegedly threatened to prevent her marriage to cause her father to lose his job, and to assault her family through hired goons. Consequently, the complainant/victim lodged a police complaint against the applicant/accused, and accordingly, an FIR was registered.

5.

The learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that there was a long and unexplained delay in lodging the FIR. The victim, aged 26 years, is major and educated, and the relationship was consensual, as can be seen from the WhatsApp chats exchanged between the Applicant and the Complainant. The allegations of rape under the pretext of marriage have been falsely made, only with an intention to wreak vengeance against the Applicant. The Applicant is not having any criminal antecedents and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence the Applicant

3 PB-1.ABA-1918-2025.doc may be released on anticipatory bail.

6.

As against this, the learned APP strongly opposes the present application on the ground that the Applicant is involved in the serious offence of committing rape on the false pretext of marriage. The office is punishable under Section 69 BNS with 10 years of imprisonment. The crime is against the society and as such the Applicant may not be released on bail.

.

The learned appointed Counsel for the victim has given no objection to the grant of anticipatory bail to the present Applicant, as the Applicant and the Complainant have arrived at an amicable settlement when the matter was referred to the Mediator. The mediation report is placed on record, and the consent terms are signed before the Mediator. It is submitted that the act was consensual in nature, and therefore, an appropriate order may be passed in the present application.

7.

I have gone through the investigation papers made available by the learned APP, as well as the consent terms signed by both parties along with the Mediator's report, which records that the matter is amicably settled. The mediation report is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. The whats-app chat exchanges prima facie shows the consensual relationship. Taking into consideration that the Applicant was protected vide interim order dated 07.11.2025, and that the Applicant has attended the police station and cooperated with the investigation, I do not see any

4 PB-1.ABA-1918-2025.doc impediment in confirming the interim order and releasing the Applicant on bail. Hence, the following order:

ORDER

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) The interim order dated 07.11.2025 is hereby confirmed. (iii) The parties to act in accordance with the terms settled before the Mediator.

(iv) The Applicant is directed not to tamper with the evidence and shall not threaten the complainant or her relatives. (v) The Applicant shall attend the trial on each and every date unless so exempted by the trial Court on emergency conditions. (vi) The Applicant shall submit his Aadhar and PAN Cards to the Investigating Officer and detailed addresses and phone numbers of himself and two of the near relatives.

(vii) A single violation of the aforesaid conditions, would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail of the Applicant on that ground.

(viii) The High Court Legal Aid Sub-Committee shall pay the fees to the learned appointed Counsel for the Respondent No.2 as per rules. (ix) With the aforesaid directions, the application is disposed of. MEHROZ K. PATHAN JUDGE NAJEEB..