Krushna Vilas Lamb v. State Of Maharashtra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2446 OF 2025 Krushna Vilas Lamb ...Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra
...Respondent
_______ Ms. Shubhangi Parulekar a/w Mr. Yash Bhoye for Applicant. Mr. Ranoji Deshmukh for First Informant/Complainant. Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the Respondent-State. _______
CORAM
:
SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE :
8th SEPTEMBER 2025 P.C.
1.
By this application, applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.7 of 2025 registered with Pandharpur City Police Station, District:Solapur for the offences punishable under Sections 64(1), 64(2)(e) and 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS").
2.
It is prosecution's case that applicant is compounder in hospital. When first informant had gone to hospital due to stomach ache, at that time applicant outraged her modesty and inserted finger in her private part.
by SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR Date:
2025.09.09 18:35:11 +0530 SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR
3.
It is contention of learned counsel for applicant that applicant is behind bar around eight months. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. First informant has no objection to allow the application.
4.
It is contention of learned A.P.P. that applicant was compounder and while doing his duty, he has outraged the modesty of first informant and inserted finger in her private part. The offence committed by the applicant is heinous. If he released on bail, he may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.
5.
Learned counsel for Complainant/first informant submits that he will file Vakalatnama and seeks leave to tender Affidavit. Leave granted. Learned counsel for Complainant/first informant submits that the Complainant has no objection to allow the application. He further submitted that complaint was lodged due to misunderstanding and requested to pass appropriate orders. 6.
I have heard all the learned counsels, perused the FIR and documents produced on record. The allegations against the applicant are of outraging modesty of the first informant and inserting finger in private part of the first informant. It is contention of learned counsel for first informant that complaint was filed due to misunderstanding.
Applicant is behind bar around eight months. Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed. Considering these facts, his further detention is not required.
7.
In view of the above, I pass the following order :
ORDER
(i) Application is allowed;
(ii) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.7 of 2025 registered with Pandharpur City Police Station, District:Solapur, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(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.
8.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.
9.
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.
10.
All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)