Chamankumar Parelal Ram v. State Of Maharashtra And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 205 OF 2026 Chamankumar Parelal Ram ....Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra and anr.
....Respondents _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Someshwar K. Pawale along with Mr. Harsh Kashyap and Mr. Aniket Borude, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. Prashant P. Jadhav, APP for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Gunjan Thakkar, Advocate for Respondent No.2.(Appointed Advocate).
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM
: SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 12th MARCH, 2026.
P.C. :
1.
By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.90 of 2025 registered with Pimpri Police Station, District Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 75, 78 and 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 8 and 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2.
It is prosecution's case that on 5th March 2025, the applicant outraged the modesty of the minor daughter of the first informant. 3.
It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that the SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM applicant is behind bars for around one year. There is no progress in the SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.03.13 16:22:22 +0530 trial. It may take time to conclude the trial, hence, requested to allow the
application.
4.
It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for respondent No. 2 that the applicant outraged the modesty of the victim, who was six years old. There are eye-witnesses to the incident. If the applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the victim and the prosecution witnesses. The applicant has antecedents, and requested to reject the application.
5.
I have heard all learned counsel, perused charge sheet and documents produced on record. The allegations against the applicant are of outraging the modesty of a minor victim. The applicant is behind bars for around one year. There is no progress in the trial. It may take time to conclude the trial. The investigation is completed and the charge sheet has been filed. Considering these facts, I pass the following order:
ORDER
(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.90 of 2025 registered with Pimpri Police Station, District Pune, on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The applicant shall not enter Pimpri Chinchwad area till the conclusion of the trial, except for attending the court dates.
(iii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.
(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.
6.
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.
7.
The Maharashtra Legal Services Authority is directed to pay legal fees to appointed advocate as per Rule. 8.
All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)