Priyanka Anil Shelake v. State Of Maharashtra

Digitally signed by CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Date:

2025.08.11 10:37:49 +0530 CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Chitra Sonawane 906-aba-2210-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Anticipatory Bail Application No.2210 of 2025 Priyanka Anil Shelake Age: 30 yrs, Occ: Service, R/o Jijau Chowk, Jyotirling Vasti, Tasgaon, Dist.Sangli.

... Applicant.

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra Through Bharti Vidyapeeth Police Station, Pune vide CR No.263/2025. ... Respondent. --- Mr Priyal Sarda for the applicant.

Mr SV Walve, APP for the respondent / State.

PSI Ravi Jadhav, Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, Pune. --- Coram : R.N.Laddha, J.

Date : 8 August 2025.

P.C. :

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.263 of 2025, registered at Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, Pune city, for offences punishable under Sections 309(6), 305, 351(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. 2.

According to the prosecution, the informant and the applicant had been in a live-in relationship for Page No. 1 of 5

Chitra Sonawane 906-aba-2210-2025.doc approximately four years. On 27 May 2025, the applicant's father telephonically contacted the informant, shared a specific location, and requested his presence there. Upon the informant's arrival at the said location, the father of the applicant along with others, forcibly confined the informant in a room and physically assaulted him. During the said incident, one of the assailants unlawfully took possession of the informant's mobile phone and, without his consent, transferred an amount of Rs.35,000/- via PhonePe to the applicant. The accused persons further issued threats, demanding an additional sum of money. Under such duress, the informant contacted his sister, Madhuri, and requested Rs.50,000/-, which upon receipt was also transferred via PhonePe to the applicant.

In addition, the accused persons misappropriated a sum of Rs.42,000/- from the informant's bag. Subsequently, they coerced the informant to pay an amount of Rs.5,50,000/-, subjecting him to further physical assault. The accused persons also issued threats to falsely implicate the informant in a rape case. Furthermore, it is alleged that the accused unlawfully obtained the keys to the informant's residence, entered his room without permission, compelled him to sign blank cheques and took away his Page No.

Chitra Sonawane 906-aba-2210-2025.doc laptop along with the bag containing his academic documents.

3.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant had, prior in time, lodged an FIR against the present informant for offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 115(2), 351(2), 351(3) of the BNS, alleging that the informant had sexually assaulted her by obscene videos of the applicant. The present FIR is a retaliatory measure, filed as a counterblast to the applicant's prior FIR. The learned Counsel further submits that there are no allegations attributing to the applicant the commission of robbery or theft of any property. The documentary record also reflects the existence of several bank transactions between the applicant and the informant. The allegations of robbery and assault are directed against the co-accused and not against the applicant.

4.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/State, opposed the application, submitting that the allegations levelled are of a grave nature and that Page No. 3 of 5

Chitra Sonawane 906-aba-2210-2025.doc the property alleged to have been robbed is yet to be recovered. The learned APP, however, fairly concedes that a cross-FIR, which is prior in point of time, has already been filed by the informant, and that crime vide CR No.261 of 2025 has been registered at the same police station against the present informant.

5.

Upon perusing the records, it emerges that the applicant and the informant had been cohabiting in a live-in relationship for the past four years. It is also evident from the record that the applicant has instituted a cross-FIR against the present informant, which was registered prior in point of time to the FIR giving rise to the present proceedings.

6.

The allegations pertaining to physical assault, the alleged snatching of a laptop and cash, and the purported unauthorised transfer of funds, are specifically directed against the co-accused persons, and not against the present applicant. Save and except for bare and unsubstantiated assertions, there is, prima faice, no cogent or tangible material brought on record that would substantiate the applicant's direct involvement in the incident in question. Page No. 4 of 5

Chitra Sonawane 906-aba-2210-2025.doc 7.

In view of the foregoing circumstances and taking into consideration the nature of accusations against the present applicant, this Court is satisfied that the applicant has made out a case for the exercise of discretion to grant the anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the following order is passed.

ORDER

(i) In the event of the applicant's arrest in connection with CR No.263 of 2025, registered at Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, Pune city, she shall be released on bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The applicant shall join the investigation as and when called by the Investigating Officer.

and (iii) The applicant, herself or through any other person, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.

.

8.

The application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms.

[R. N. Laddha, J.] Page No. 5 of 5