Shobha Krushna Sonkamble v. State Of Maharashtra

Harish

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2284 OF 2025 Shobha Krushna Sonkamble .....Applicant Vs State Of Maharashtra .....Respondent HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Digitally signed by HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Date:

2025.09.10 20:13:25 +0530 Adv. Shrikant Panhale for the Applicant.

Mr. S. S. Chaudhari, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM :

SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE :

9th SEPTEMBER 2025 P.C.:

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R.No. 409 of 2024 registered with Satara Taluka Police Station, for the offences punishable under Section 376, 376(2) (n), 312, 313 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and offences under Sections 4, 6, 8, 12, 17 and 19 of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2.

It is prosecution's case that the son (accused no. 1) of the applicant sexually assaulted the minor daughter of the first informant on promise of marriage. It is alleged that the applicant supported the accused no. 1 for keeping relation with 1/4

the victim.

3.

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been behind bar more than four months. The allegation against the applicant that she had supported the accused no. 1 to keep relation with the victim which is false. The applicant is a lady. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is the contention of learned APP that the applicant was aware about the age of the victim. She did not prevent accused no. 1 from having a relationship with the victim. Hence, requested to reject the application.

5.

It is the contention of learned counsel for respondent no. 2 that respondent no. 2 has no objection to allow the bail application.

6.

I have heard all the learned counsel. Perused the FIR, and documents produced on record.

7.

The allegations against the applicant that she had supported her son i.e. accused No. 1 for keeping relation with the victim. She is behind bar more than four months. Investigation is completed. Chargesheet has been filed. 2/4

Considering these facts, further detention of the applicant is not required.

8.

In view of above, I pass the following order :

ORDER

(i) The application is allowed.

(ii) The applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 409 of 2024 registered with Satara Taluka Police Station, 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 attend the trial court proceeding regularly.

(iv) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

(v) The applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and mobile number immediately after being released and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Investigating Officer.

(vi) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

3/4

9.

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

10.

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. 11.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

[SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.] 4/4