Bharat Shankar Ghorpade v. State Of Maharashtra And Another
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2256 OF 2025 Bharat Shankar Ghorpade ...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra And Another
...Respondents
_______ Mr. Shivraj V. Rane a/w Mr. Harshvardhan S. Rane a/w Mr. Harishchandra R. Kale for Applicant.
Mr. Onkar Ghatage for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Nitin B. Patil, APP for the Respondent No.1-State. PSI Punam S. Magdum, Miraj Rural Police Station, Sangli, present. _______
CORAM
:
SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE :
8th SEPTEMBER 2025 P.C.
1.
Applicant is apprehending arrest in Crime No.390 of 2025 registered with Miraj Rural Police Station, Dist. Sangli for the offences punishable under Sections 74 & 333 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for Short "BNS") and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2.
It is prosecution's case that on 20th July 2025, applicant entered in the house of first informant and outraged modesty of his minor daughter.
Digitally signed by SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR Date:
2025.09.09 17:42:48 +0530 SAJAKALI LIYAKAT JAMADAR
3.
It is contention of learned counsel for applicant that there is delay in lodging the FIR. The said FIR was lodged out of financial transaction. The application is reputed person. He is on interim bail. He has cooperated with investigation and requested to allow the application.
4.
It is contention of learned APP that applicant has outraged the modesty of minor victim. He submitted that applicant has two antecedents. Considering the allegations against the applicant his custodial interrogation is required. Hence, requested to reject the application.
5.
Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 submits that the FIR was lodged against the applicant due to misunderstanding. There was financial transaction between the applicant and first informant. Out of that, the said FIR was lodged. Respondent No.2 has no objection to allow the application.
6.
I have heard all the learned counsels, perused the FIR and documents placed on record. There is delay of six days in lodging the complaint. The allegations against the applicant are that he has outraged the modesty of the minor daughter of the first informant. As there is six days delay in lodging the FIR, I pass the following order.
ORDER
(i) Application is allowed;
(ii) In the event of arrest, the applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.390 of 2025 registered with Miraj Rural Police Station, Dist. Sangli, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. (iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the first informant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.
(iv) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.
7.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.
8.
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.
9.
All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)