Balaji Vijaykumar Mangrule v. The State Of Maharashtra
2026:BHC-AUG:19309
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 606 OF 2026 Balaji s/o Vijaykumar Mangrule, Age 42 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Shivba Nagar, Degloor, Tq.
Degloor, Dist. Nanded ...
Applicant
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra, Through Police Inspector, Police Station Bhagyanagar, Tq. & Dist. Nanded.
...
Respondent.
...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Deshpande Gaurav L. A.P.P. for Respondent/State : Mr. C.V. Bhadane Advocate for Assist to APP : Mr. Rahul R. Awhad h/f Mr. Hake Rupesh Bapurao ...
CORAM
: SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
DATE : 28.04.2026 PER COURT :
Heard both sides.
2.
The applicant is seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No. 656/2025, registered with Bhagyanagar Police Station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(f), 64(2)(m), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3.
It is reported by the informant that applicant was brother in law of her sister Alka. She was knowing him and his wife and they were present for a ceremony. The photographs and videos of the ceremony were shared by the applicant with the informant. It is alleged that applicant was stalking her. It is further alleged that on 23.03.2024, when the informant and her 1/4
daughter had been to the place of applicant, she was subjected to rape in the mid night. The applicant is alleged to have threatened the informant for making the photographs and videos viral on social media. It is further alleged that on 10.06.2024 there was another episode of sexual assault. She is alleged to have been threatened by sending photographs of suicide. The applicant is alleged to have exploited her in the month of March and April 2025 also. The law was set into motion and he was arrested on 18.12.2025. The Charge-sheet is filed on 27.01.2026.
4.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the entire prosecution theory is improbable. The informant had consensually kept the relationship for sufficient long time with the applicant. She could have made complaint had she not been the consenting party or she was coerced by the applicant. My attention is adverted to CDR report to falsify the theory of the episode occurred on 23.03.2024. The delayed registration of FIR and repetitive sexual encounter would indicate consensual relations. The history narrated by the informant at the time of medical examination would deny the prosecution theory.
5.
Learned A.P.P. would submit that the applicant threatened the informant from time to time of sending the photographs of his proposed suicide. The supplementary statement of the informant and her statement under Section 183 are consistent with the prosecution theory. The statement of witnesses Somnath, Rajnikant and Rahul would make out the case against the applicant. The informant is subjected to sexual exploitation under the threat.
6.
The informant is a married woman and has two children. She was acquainted with the applicant, who is a distant relative. The report refers to first episode on 23.03.2024 at Nanded. The next episode on 10.06.2024 and further more in March and April 2025. From 23.03.2024 till filing of the complaint on 18.12.2025, the applicant is alleged to have been sexually 2/4
exploited the informant. It is the case of the prosecution that constant threats of making the photographs viral were extended for obtaining the sexual pleasures.
7.
It is incomprehensible as to why the informant did not approach the police or cause intervention of the elderly persons in the family. No circumstances are pointed out to indicate that she was unable to approach the police. Only reason assigned by her was the threats given by the applicant. I find some substance in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant that prolonged relationship between the applicant and the informant involving repetitive episodes of sexual encounter would indicate consensual relationship.
8.
My attention is adverted to CDR disclosing the phone calls of the applicant and the informant. At this stage, I am not impressed by the submissions. This aspect can be gone into during the course of trial. 9.
My attention is adverted to the history given by the informant at the time of her medical examination. The informant is alleged to have been lured by the applicant, by extending promise to marry and to look after her children. This aspect of the matter is missing in her complaint. The prosecution theory appears to be improbable. Being a married woman and being mother of two children, medical examination is of very little help to the prosecution.
10.
No incriminating material is recovered from the applicant or from his mobile handset. The purport of statement under Section 183 would be gone into during the course of trial. The statements of witnesses Somnath, Rajnikant and Rahul are of little help to make out a case against the applicant at this stage of the proceeding.
11.
The applicant is behind bar since 18.12.2025. Further custody is not required. I, therefore, pass following order: 3/4
12.
The Bail Application is allowed.
13.
The applicant Balaji s/o Vijaykumar Mangrule shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 656/2025, registered with Bhagyanagar Police Station, District Nanded, for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(f), 64(2)(m), 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on following conditions:
(a) The applicant shall furnish P.R. bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one solvent surety of like amount.
(b) The applicant shall desist from indulging into contacting the victim or her witnesses through social media.
(c) The applicant shall cooperate for expeditious disposal of the case.
(d) The applicant shall furnish his mobile/cell number and address to the investigating officer.
(e) The applicant shall surrender his Aadhar Card and PAN card to the investigating officer.
( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) mkd/- 4/4