Himanshu Satyayendra Narayan Singh v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1551 OF 2025 Himanshu Satyayendra Narayan Singh ...Applicant V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
...Respondents.
..............
Mr. Vishal M. Deshmukh for the Applicant.
Mr. Tanveer Khan, APP for the Respondent/State. Ms Komal Sinha, Appointed Advocate for the Respondent No.2. PI Arvind Kamble, Bangur Nagar Police Station present. ..............
CORAM
:
N.R. BORKAR, J.
DATE :
24.09.2025.
P.C. :
1.
This is an application for anticipatory bail. 2.
The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 213 of 2025 registered at Bangur Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 305, 308(2), 352, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nayaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
3.
The applicant is the husband of sister-in-law of the prosecutrix. According to the prosecution, the applicant had lured the prosecutrix to develop physical relationship with him. It is alleged that he covertly recorded their physical relations and on the basis of the said recording he started blackmailing her. It is alleged that he coerced her into physical relations by threatening her that he would send the said recording to her husband. It is 1/3
alleged that he extorted money from her by threatening her that he would circulate the said recording.
4.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, the learned APP for the respondent / State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2/prosecutrix.
5.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged physical relations were consensual. It is submitted that as the prosecutrix wanted to marry the applicant, she made the applicant to file divorce petition. It is submitted that there is no need of custodial interrogation and the applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation.
6.
On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State and the learned counsel for respondent No.2/prosecutrix submit that the prosecutrix was lured into physical relations. It is submitted that the applicant covertly recorded their physical relations and then started blackmailing her on the basis of said recording. It is submitted that he extorted money from her. Learned APP and learned counsel for respondent No.2/prosecutrix submit that considering the nature of crime, the applicant may not be released on anticipatory bail.
7.
I have perused the FIR. Prima facie, the physical relations between the applicant and the prosecutrix appears to be consensual. As regards the allegations of extortion, there is a delay in lodging the FIR.
2/3
8.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail. In the result the following order is passed.
ORDER
A) The Application is allowed.
B) In the event of arrest of the applicant in C.R. No.213 of 2025 registered at Bangur Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 305, 308(2), 352, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nayaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, he be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety or two sureties in the like amount.
C) The applicant shall not enter into the corporation limits of Mumbai City till conclusion of trial, except to attend the dates before the trial Court.
D) The applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer. E) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses and shall not contact the prosecutrix. [N.R.BORKAR, J.] 3/3