Nikhil Ajay Bagade v. The State of Maharashtra and another

Legal Reasoning

ba827.25--1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABADBAIL APPLICATION NO. 827 OF 2025Nikhil Ajay Bagade ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and another ...Respondents …..Advocate for the applicant: Mr. A.B. Chormal A.P.P. for the respondent No.1: Mr. R.S. Wani Advocate for respondent No.2: Ms. Pooja K. Apache (appointed) ….. ANDBAIL APPLICATION NO. 1172 OF 2025Rohit Balu Dhakare...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and another ...Respondents …..Advocate for the applicant: Mr. Balraj Pande A.P.P. for the respondent No.1: Mr. R. S. Wani Advocate for respondent No.2: Ms. Pooja K. Apache (appointed) ….. AND BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1178 OF 2025Indrajeet Janak Pawar ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and another ...Respondents …..Advocate for the applicant: Mr. D.S. Kale A.P.P. for the respondent No.1: Mr. R.S. Wani Advocate for respondent No.2: Ms. Pooja K. Apache (appointed) ….. ba827.25--2- CORAM:SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.DATE OF RESERVING THEORDER: 09.09.2025DATE OF PRONOUNCING ORDER: 30.09.2025 PER COURT :- 1.All these applications are filed for grant of regular bailunder section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS),2023. The bail application Nos. 827 of 2025 and 1172 of 2025 arefiled in connection with crime No. 200 of 2024 registered withVedant Nagar police station, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar forthe offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 64 and 3(5) ofBharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 4(1), 5(n), 6, 8, 9(i)and 10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012(hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the “POCSO Act”)whereas the bail application No. 1178 of 2025 is filed in connectionwith crime No. 125 of 2025 registered with Bidkin Police Station,District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (Rural) for the offencespunishable under Sections 137(2), 64 and 64(2)(I)(M) of BharatiyaNyay Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act,2.The informant averred in the report that on 02.12.2024 at about5.00 p.m. when he went to meet his daughter at her hostel, who is 17years old, at that time he came to know that on 30.11.2024, his ba827.25--3- daughter went towards village, which was noted in the register of thehostel. When he enquired with the other girl students who were inthe hostel, they could not tell him about his daughter. When theinformant tried to make phone calls to his daughter, her mobilephone was switched off. Then he searched for his daughter at therailway station, bus stand, garden, and other places, but she couldnot be found.3.After the daughter of the informant was found, her statementcame to be recorded in which she has stated that the applicant in bailapplication No. 1172 of 2025 is her cousin. On 8.11.2024, at about9.00 a.m. when she was at her hostel, applicant Rohit called her andasked her to come at Pusad to visit him. She said that she didn’twant to come to Pusad because her father would get angry and scoldher. In response, the applicant, Rohit, said that he would not tellanyone that she had come to visit him. She then came to Pusad, andRohit went to fetch her. Then Rohit took her to his farmhouse. Atthat time, they both stayed there for entire night. At the night time,Rohit committed forcible sexual intercourse with her against her will.On 9.11.2024 she came back to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. Theapplicant, Rohit, used to call her frequently and would ask her to visithim. On 23.11.2024 she again went to Pusad to meet Rohit. Theyboth stayed there for two days. Again, applicant Rohit committed ba827.25--4- sexual intercourse with her against her wish. On 25.11.2024 shecame back to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. She was not able toconcentrate on her studies, did not attend her classes, and stayed inthe hostel. She felt that if the fact that she went to visit Rohit atPusad, is revealed to her parents, they will stop her education.4.On 30.11.2024, she left the hostel and reached at Manmad bya train. She was searching for food. When she was standing in frontof a petrol pump, a boy working there, came to her and enquired withher. That boy took her to the hotel at Railway station. He told hisname as Nikhil Bagade, the applicant in bail application No. 827 of2025. After having lunch there, he asked the prosecutrix as to whereshe is going. She said that she will stay there. Upon which, theapplicant Nikhil took her to a lodge and they stayed there and hecommitted forcible sexual intercourse with her.5.On 01.12.2024, the prosecutrix went to Parbhani. While shewas standing at the railway station, a man approached her andasked where she was going. She did not respond to him. She stayedin the waiting room for the entire night. The next morning, the sameman met her again, and upon his question, she told him that she waslooking for a job. He said that he will give her a job. He took her toWasmat. His name is Pradeep Shinde. For entire day they visited ba827.25--5- many places. At night time, he took her in a room. For two times, hecommitted sexual intercourse with her. Pradeep Shinde purchased amobile Sim-card in her name. He took her in the house of onewoman. There, he stayed with the prosecutrix and committedsexual intercourse with her. On the next day, he took her mobilehandset and then went away. The prosecutrix stayed there for 5/6days. When again Pradeep Shinde met her, he did not give mobilehandset to her, however, he gave Rs.800/- to her.6.The prosecutrix further stated that thereafter, she came toParali. She stayed on the Railway station. On the next day, shewent to Latur and then went to Barshi by a bus. Thereafter, she wentto Shivajinagar, Pune. She made a phone call to Pradeep Shinde.He said to call his friend Onkar @ Samadhan. She made a phonecall to him. He called her to Bhosari and took her to his flat on amotorcycle. There, he committed sexual intercourse with her. Onthe next day, he took her to a room in M.I.D.C. Bhosri, where onewoman was residing. The prosecutrix stayed there for 7 to 8 days.In the meanwhile, Onkar took her two times at the flat and committedforcible sexual intercourse with her. Therefore, the informant lodgedreport bearing No. 200 of 2024 with Vedant Nagar Police Station,Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, against Rohit Balu Dhakare and NikhilAjay Bagade. ba827.25--6- 7.In respect of Indrajeet Pawar, the applicant in bail applicationNo. 1178 of 2025, the prosecutrix stated that on 01.03.2025, whenshe was in sleep in her room, at 5.00 a.m. the applicant IndrajeetPawar came and knocked the door of her house. After opening thedoor by the prosecutrix, he entered in the room and committedforcible sexual intercourse with her. Because of fear, she could notsaid anything about it to anybody. She made phone calls to herfather. On 2.3.2025 Indrajeet again came there and forciblycommitted sexual intercourse with her. When she went to Ellora forDarshan of Grishnashwar, the police caught her and therefore, reportwas lodged vide Crime No. 125 of 2025 in the Bidkin police Station,Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, against Indrajeet Janak Pawar. 8.Learned advocates for the applicants, in respectiveapplications, submitted that the applicants are falsely implicated inthe crime. They have roots in society. Learned advocates submittedthat the victim was of understanding age, knowing the consequencesof her acts. Though she has narrated the story, it is highlyimprobable that she had travelled at various places and everyone,who came into her contact, had sexually assaulted her. There is noindication that she made any attempt to resist. They will not fleeaway from the trial. The trial will take a long period. The applicants ba827.25--7- have no criminal antecedents. It is lastly prayed to allow theapplications. 9.Learned A.P.P. for respondent No.1 State and learnedadvocate for respondent No.2 prosecutrix, in all applications,submitted that all the applicants are booked for serious crime. Theapplicants have committed heinous crimes against a child bysexually exploiting her. Considering the fact that the applicants areinvolved in a serious crime of commission of rape, if they arereleased on bail, certainly they will pressurize the prosecutionwitnesses and tamper with the evidence. It is lastly prayed to rejectthe applications. 10.Perused the charge sheets in both the crimes. It is to be notedthat the report was not lodged immediately after the allegedaggravated sexual assault committed against the will of theprosecutrix. The statements of the victim have been recorded. Fromher conduct, it appears that although she is technically a child as perthe provisions of the POCSO Act, she is of an age of understanding.Further, she voluntarily went to meet applicant Rohit at Pusad, whois her cousin. As regards the other applicants are concerned, duringthe course of commission of the alleged aggravated sexual assault,the prosecutrix did not resist, and the report was not lodged ba827.25--8- immediately after the alleged incidents. Considering all theseaspects, as well as the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Courtin the cases of Sunil Mahadev Patil v. State of Maharashtra, 2015SCC OnLine Bom 6204, and Mohd. Ajaan Khan v. State ofMaharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 308, and taking into accountthe prosecutrix's age of understanding and her conduct after theincident and the cardinal principle of bail i.e. bail is rule and jail isexception, the applications deserve to be allowed, on the followingconditions. Hence the following order:- O R D E RI.Applications are allowed.II.The applicants in bail application No. 827 of 2025 and Bailapplication No. 1172 of 2025 in connection with crime No. 200of 2024 registered with Vedant Nagar police station, DistrictChhatrapati Sambhajinagar and the applicant in bail applicationNo.1178 of 2025 in connection with crime No. 125 of 2025registered with Bidkin Police Station, District ChhatrapatiSambhajinagar (Rural), be released on bail on furnishingpersonal bond of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety each of thelike amount on following conditions:- a)The applicants shall not tamper with the prosecutionevidence and shall not pressurize the witnesses, in anymanner. ba827.25--9- 11.Since Ms. Pooja Apache, learned advocate is appointed toprosecute the cause of respondent No.2, in all applications, her feesbe paid as per the schedule of fees maintained by the High CourtLegal Services, Sub-Committee, Aurangabad. (SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) rlj/