Shahrukh Akhatar Ansari v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4782 OF 2025 Shahrukh Akhatar Ansari ... Applicant/s

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

... Respondent/s _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Mihir N. Kasliwal i/b. Mr. Rahul Kasliwal, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. S. S. Pednekar, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Pratik Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.2. _________________________________________________________________

CORAM

: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

DATE : 4th MARCH, 2026.

P.C. :

1.

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No. 279 of 2025 registered with Bhadrakali Police Station, District Nashik, for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 74, 137(2) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2.

It is prosecution's case that the applicant sexually assaulted the first informant by threatening to make viral the photographs taken by him with her.

Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date:

2026.03.06 11:08:02 +0530 3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that there is SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM delay of seven months in lodging the complaint. At the time of the incident, the victim was 16 years old. There is no medical evidence about

sexual assault. The applicant is behind bars for more than six months. He has no antecedents and requested to allow the application. 4.

It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the first informant was minor. The applicant was aware about her age. The applicant took selfies with the first informant and by threatening her that he will make viral the selfies, assaulted her sexually by taking her to lodge. If the applicant is released on bail, he may abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard all learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and documents produced on record. There is delay of seven months in lodging the complaint. The victim is more than 16 years old. The applicant has no antecedents. He is behind bars for more than six months. There is no progress in the trial. Considering these facts, I pass following order :

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 279 of 2025 registered with Bhadrakali Police Station, District Nashik, 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.)