Lucky Harendraram Gautam v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3290 OF 2025 Lucky Harendraram Gautam ... Applicant

VERSUS

State Of Maharashtra & Anr.

... Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Yash K. Dabhole, Advocate for Applicant.

Smt. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for the Respondent-State. PSI - V.K. Sarke, Poynad Police Station, present. _________________________________________________________________ by SONALI SATISH KILAJE Date:

2026.03.13 11:10:23 +0700 SONALI SATISH KILAJE

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 11th MARCH, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in C.R.No. 7 of 2025 registered with Poynad Police Station, Raigad, for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 75(2), 308(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS Act") and 67(A) of Information Technology Act, 2000.

2.

It is prosecution's case that one unknown person created whatsapp group. In the said whatsapp group, first informant, her husband and family members were added. It is alleged that some morphed photos of first informant were posted in the said whatsapp group and ransom was demanded from husband of the first informant to not to post obscene photos of first informant in the said group. It is alleged that due to

continuous harassment of applicant and co-accused, husband of first informant committed suicide.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. No amount is received by him. He has no antecedents. It may take time to conclude the trial. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that the husband of first informant had sent the amount in the bank account of the applicant. The said bank account was opened prior to the sending of that amount and later on said that it was not opened. But statement of bank officials shows that applicant had opened the said bank account. It shows involvement of the applicant in the crime. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused chargesheet and documents produced on record. The applicant is behind bars for more than one year. The allegations against the applicant are abatement to suicide. To prove it, evidence is required. The applicant has no antecedents. It may take time to conclude the trial. Considering these facts, I pass following order.

ORDER

i.

The applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 7 of 2025 registered with Poynad Police Station, Raigad, on executing P.R.Bond of Rs. 30,000/- on furnishing one or two sureties in the like amount.

ii.

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

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. 6.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of. All pending applications, if any, disposed of. 7.

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.

8.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)