← Library
Bombay High CourtABA/2534/2025allowed

Revansiddha Laxman Kalel And ANR. v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR.

2026-04-27Hon'Ble Shri Justice M. W. Chandwani3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

Digitally signed by HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Date:

2026.04.27 18:25:34 +0530 HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2534 OF 2025

1. Revansiddha Laxman Kalel

2. Jiwan Laxman Kalel ...Applicants

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra And Anr.

...Respondents

*** Adv. Laxman K. Kalel for the Applicants.

Mr. S. H. Yadav, APP for the Non-applicant State. Mr. Rajesh B. Bhosle for non-applicant No. 2. Mr. Navnath Subhash Mane, HC, Sangola Police Station. ***

CORAM

:

M. W. CHANDWANI, J.

DATE :

27th APRIL, 2026.

P.C.

1.

The Applicants are apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No.648/2025 registered with Police Station, Sangola, Dist. Solapur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 87, 137(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, 2.

Heard the learned counsel for the Applicant, learned APP for non-applicant No. 1-State and the learned counsel for Non-applicant No. 2. 3.

Having gone through the case diary, it appears that the Applicants are the cousin brothers of co-accused Samadhan, who had eloped with the victim girl, who was on the verge of attaining the age of 18 years. Co-accused Samadhan took the victim to a lodge and sexually assaulted her. Subsequently, upon the victim attaining majority, her

marriage was solemnized with co-accused Samadhan. In the meantime, the mother of the victim lodged a missing complaint at Sangola Police Station. Accordingly, an offence of kidnapping under Section 137(2) came to be registered against unknown persons. During the investigation, the coaccused was apprehended by the police, and the victim girl was found in his company. Upon recording the statement of the victim, offences under the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ("POCSO Act") came to be added.

4.

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the Applicants that the allegations against the present Applicants are that they helped the coaccused in eloping with the victim girl and assisting the co-accused and the victim for performing marriage, by providing financial assistance. 5.

The co-accused was updating all subsequent developments to the present Applicants since the day he eloped with the victim girl. It also appears that after attaining the age at 18 years, the Applicants assisted the co-accused and the victim to perform marriage. 6.

The main co-accused has already been arrested which goes to show that most part of the investigation is already complete. Nothing is required to be seized from the present Applicants. Both the Applicants are in their teenage. Considering that the offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 is not attributable to the present Applicants and having regard to their limited role which is confined to the alleged instigation/abetment in eloping the girl, a case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. Hence the following order : I.

The application is allowed.

II.

In the event of arrest of applicants -Revansiddha Laxman Kalel and Jiwan Laxman Kalel in connection with Crime No.648/2025 registered with Police Station, Sangola, Dist. Solapur Rural for the offences punishable under Sections

64, 87, 137(2) read with section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, they be released on bail on furnishing a PR bond of Rs.25,000/- each with one solvent surety each in the like amount. III. The applicants shall attend the concerned police station on every Friday and Monday between 12.00 pm to 2.00 pm for a period of two weeks and shall co-operate in the investigation.

IV.

The applicants shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidence or threaten the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

7.

With this, the Application stands disposed of. [M. W. CHANDWANI, J.]