Ujagirlal Ramlakhan Bansal v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4111 OF 2025 Ujagirlal Ramlakhan Bansal ....Applicant versus The State Of Maharashtra and anr.

....Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Ateet Shirodkar, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. M. G.Patil, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Ilsa Shaikh, Advocate for Respondent No.2. PSI-Suraj Patil, Nagothane Police Station present. _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 6th APRIL, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 33 of 2025 registered with Nagothane Police Station, District Raigad, for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 351(2)(3) and 333 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

2.

It is prosecution's case that on 22nd March 2025, the applicant sexually assaulted the victim by threatening her with a knife. 3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that there is a delay of three days in lodging the complaint. The physical relationship between the applicant and the first informant was consensual. The SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM applicant has no antecedents. He is behind bars for more than one year SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.04.08 15:05:19 +0530 and, there is no progress in the trial. Learned counsel for the applicant

further submitted that the first informant has consented before the Trial Court to allow the bail application of the applicant. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for respondent No. 2, that there are specific allegations against the applicant that he, by taking a knife in his hand, blocked the door of the house of the first informant and sexually assaulted her by threatening her. The FIR was lodged after three days as the first informant was in shock. The applicant is a relative of the first informant, if he is released on bail, he may threaten the first informant and prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard all learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. There is a delay of three days in lodging the FIR. To prove the allegations against the applicant, trial is required. The applicant has no antecedents. The applicant is behind bars for more than one year, and it may take time to conclude the trial. Considering these facts, I pass following order :

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 33 of 2025 registered with Nagothane Police Station, District Raigad, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with 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.

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

6.

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.

7.

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