Sachin Bapurao Kalbhor v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1227 OF 2025 Sachin Bapurao Kalbhor ...Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

...Respondent

Mr. Amit Icham, for the Applicant.

Ms. R. V. Newton, APP, for the Respondent No.1-State. Mr. Mustafa Shaikh i/b. Adv. Ujma Patha, for the Respondent No.2. Ms. Dipali Gaikwad, PSI, attached to Baramati Taluka Police Station, District -Pune, present.

CORAM:

MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

DATED :

27th FEBRUARY 2026 PC:- 1.

Heard Mr. Amit Icham, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant, Ms. Newton, learned APP appearing for the Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Shaikh, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2.

2.

This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.82 of 2025 registered with Baramati Taluka Police Station, District-Pune, for the offences punishable

under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), 376-B, 354, 354-A, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3.

The prosecution case is set out in paragraph No.2 of the Anticipatory Bail Application, which reads as under: "2) It is the case of the prosecution:

a. That the present crime is registered at the instance of Complainant.

b. It is the case of the Complainant that she was married to the present Applicant in the year 2013 and got divorce in the year 2024. In between the period of the marriage, the Complainant met the present Applicant's friend Sagar Bhosle. After which the Complainant got into a relationship with him. c. The Complainant further alleged that the present Applicant had taken a loan from Vikas Gore who used to frequently come to her house asking for repayment. Thereafter, in May 2022, when the present Applicant was not at home, Vikas Gore came to the house and told her, "Your husband has sent me." He then directly hugged her from behind and pushed her onto the bed, trying to force himself on her in a shameful manner. She screamed loudly and somehow pushed him away. Thereafter, when the Complainant asked the present Applicant as to why he had sent Vikas Gore, to which the present Applicant threatened her with life and in the meantime she spoke about the above incident to Sagar Bhosale.

d. The Complainant further alleged that during this this period, Sagar Bhosale kept on calling her from

different mobile numbers and promised her of marriage.

e. The Complainant further alleged that between April 2019 to December 2020, she was living at Flat No.4, Shubhashree Apartment, Suryanagri, MIDC Baramati, and the present Applicant would be away from home. So, Sagar Bhosale would often visit her and kept saying, "I love you," "I want to marry you," and tried to get physically close and often emotionally manipulated her.

f. The Complainant further alleged that Sagar Bhosale would threaten her by asking private pictures of her and if refuse to listen to him, he would tell the present Applicant about her affair. g. The Complainant further alleged that, Sagar Bhosale gave two trucks worth 40 lakh to the ₹ present Applicant in exchange for the divorce. h. The Complainant further alleged that after the divorce, she moved out of present Applicant's house and started staying in a rented room in Pune. She kept asking Sagar Bhosale to marry her and he kept on ignoring and blocking her.

i. The Complainant further alleged that since she had all her belongings at the present Applicant's house. So she went there again where the present Applicant forcibly had physical relations without her consent, and on the next day, he took 50,000 from ₹ her and threw her out of the house.

j. Thereafter, the Complainant realized that the present Applicant and Sagar Bhosale both colluded, manipulated her, and ruined her life by forcing her to divorce. Based on these allegations which are detailed in the FIR, the complainant lodged the report. Hereto marked and annexed as "Exhibit A" is the copy of the FIR."

4.

It is the submission of Mr. Icham, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant that the Applicant and the First Informant were husband and wife. However, as the First Informant was having relationship outside marriage with the co-accused-Sagar Bhosale, she wanted to marry him and therefore, the Applicant and the First Informant applied for divorce by consent and decree of divorce has been passed on 20th January 2024. Thereafter, as the said coaccused-Sagar Bhosale refused to marry the First Informant and therefore, the false FIR has been filed. He submits that the chargesheet has already been filed on 20th May 2025. Therefore, the custodial interrogation is not necessary. 5.

On the other hand Ms. Newton, learned APP appearing for the Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Shaikh, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2 strongly oppose the Anticipatory Bail Application. Both of them submitted that the offence is very serious and there is likelihood that witnesses will be pressurized. Both of them submitted that the Applicant is having three antecedents bearing C.R. No.181 of 2012, C.R. No.209 of 2012 and C.R. No.511 of 2023. Therefore, both of them submitted that the Anticipatory Bail Application be rejected.

6.

Mr. Icham, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that as far as C.Rs. of the year 2012 are concerned, the Applicant has been acquitted in those cases and as far as antecedent of the year 2023 is concerned it is under Sections 323, 324, 326, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Applicant is on bail in that crime.

7.

Perusal of the record shows that the Applicant and the First Informant were married earlier. As the First Informant wanted to marry some other person i.e. one Sagar Bhosale, friend of the Applicant, at her insistence, the Applicant and the First Informant obtained divorce by consent on 20th January 2024. Thereafter, said Sagar Bhosale with whom the First Informant wanted to marry, refused to marry the First Informant and thereafter, according to the prosecution case, the Applicant kept forcible sexual relationship with the First Informant. One of the contention raised by learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant that there is possibility that FIR has been lodged as revenge. In any case, the chargesheet has already been filed. Thus, the investigation is completed. In fact, even the charges are also framed. Thus, the trial will shortly begin. Although there are antecedents against the

Applicant, as far as the antecedents of the year 2012 are concerned, the Applicant has been acquitted in those cases and as far as antecednet of the year 2013 is concerned, the Applicant is on bail in that crime.

8.

Accordingly, the case is made out for grant of Anticipatory Bail by imposing certain conditions. In view thereof, the following order is passed:

O R D E R

(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant-Sachin Bapurao Kalbhor in connection with C.R. No. of 82 of 2025 registered with the Baramati Taluka Police Station, District-Pune, the Applicant is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

(b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on 1st Sunday of each month between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial. (c) The Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and

residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep the same updated, in case of any change thereto.

(d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or to any Police personnel.

(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not contact or influence the Complainant or any witness in any manner.

9.

The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly. [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]