Pravin Savleram Jadhav v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2026:BHC-AUG:8391 :: 1 ::

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO.160 OF 2026 Pravin s/o Savleram Jadhav ... APPLICANT

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

... RESPONDENTS .......

Mr. A.T. Kanawade, Advocate for applicant Mr. C.V. Bhadane, A.P.P. for respondents No.1 and 2 Mr. J.S. Jain, Advocate for respondent No.3 (appointed) .......

CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE : 24th FEBRUARY, 2026 PER COURT :

1.

The applicant seeks release on regular bail in connection with Crime No.414/2023, registered with Ghargaon Police Station, District Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376(2), 376(2)(j), 376(2)(k), 276(2)(n), 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

:: 2 ::

2.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, the applicant and the victim were in relations with each other and conscious of the said fact, the victim has participated in the affairs, which resulted in pregnancy, which further culminated into delivery of a child. The applicant and victim were having material match in their age. The applicant is arrested on13/8/2023. The prosecution is citing in all 17 witnesses and the trial has not commenced. As such, prayed to allow the application.

3.

Per contra, the learned A.P.P. and learned counsel for respondent No.3 vehemently opposed the application, contending that, the applicant has indulged in serious crime and has committed sexual assault on the minor victim, which eventually disentitles him to be admitted to bail. Hence, prayed to reject the application. 4.

Considering the material on record and perusal of the record, prima facie, it appears that the applicant and the victim have consensual relationship and the case, prima facie, appears to be of false implication. Considering the length of incarceration of the applicant, and the fact that the trial has not progressed, and when confronted with the learned A.P.P. to demonstrate the same,

:: 3 ::

he is unable to demonstrate, the same. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to allow the application.

5.

Nevertheless, the investigation is complete for all intents and purpose. In that view of the matter, further custody of the applicant is not warranted.

6.

Hence the order :

O R D E R

(i) Bail Application is allowed.

(ii) The applicant Pravin s/o Savleram Jadhav be released on bail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one solvent surety of the like amount in the above crime, on the conditions that :

(a) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution witnesses in any way.

(b) The applicant shall remain present on each date, unless exempted by the trial Court.

(iii) Needless to state that, the observations rendered herein

:: 4 ::

are confined to the present application, and the trial Court shall decide the trial on its own merits and in accordance with law.

(iv) The High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad to pay the fees of the appointed learned counsel on behalf of respondent No.2, as per rules. (SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) fmp/-