BA 7742022
:1 :
IN THE COURT OF SESSION AT GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 774 OF 2022
(CNR NO. MHCC020043912022)
Ravi Ranjan Shamsundar Kumar
@ Rocky Singh
)
)
Applicant/Accused
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
)
(Through Malwani Police Station and )
DCBCID)
)
Respondent/Complainant
Ld. Adv. Vinayak Tare for Applicant / Accused.
Ld. APP. Kalpana Hire for State / Respondent.
CORAM : HER HONOUR THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS
JUDGE SMT. A. B. SHARMA (C.R. NO. 39)
DATED : 20.06.2022.
ORDER
This is an application for bail under Section 439 of Code of
Criminal Procedure in C.R. No. 112 of 2021 registered with Malwani
Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 292, 293, 420,
376, 328, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under
Sections 67 and 67A of the Information Technology Act read with
Sections 3, 4, 6 and 8 of the Indecent Representation of Women
(Prohibition) Act, 1986.
2.
As per FIR, the victim is model and in November 2020 she
BA 7742022
:2 :
had shoot for a web series and on 13 th December she returned to her
native place. Since 20th December 2020, she started residing at
Koparkhairane, Navi Mumbai. On 29.12.2020, one Santosh contacted
her and asked her whether she is interested to shoot for a web series at
Lonavala and she will get Rs. 25,000/ to Rs.30,000/. He also told her
that one Alisha would call her. After some time, Alisha called and told
her that shooting is at Lonavala and the web series would be available
on the paid application namely ‘Hothitmovies’. She also told the
informant that the said web series could not be shared, downloaded or
seen unless payment was made. She also told the informant that
shooting was at Lonavala and they had to leave in the evening.
Thereafter, the informant was called at Malad and in the evening the
informant reached there. It is alleged that Alisha told the informant that
other actors were busy and they would reach there and thus the
shooting was getting late, therefore, Alisha had taken the informant to
her flat. The informant stayed there. On 30.12.2020, Alisha told the
informant that shooting at Lonavala was cancelled and now the
shooting would be taken place at Madh, Malvani, Malad (West) and
prepared an agreement and obtained the signature of the informant.
Thereafter, the informant, Alisha, her husband, one cameraman Monu
and servant Suraj Sharma went to a bungalow at Madh. The accused
and coaccused Sapna Sharma also came there for shoot. First shoot of
the informant was taken with coaccused Sapna and the same was
recorded by the husband of Alisha and one Monu. Thereafter, Alisha
told the informant that the informant would have to give nude shots
and also act in nude scenes with the accused and coaccused Sapana.
When informant refused to shoot new shots, that time Alisha demanded
her Rs.10,00,000/ and also threatened to make complaint. The
informant got scared and started crying. That time, the husband of
BA 7742022
:3 :
Alisha and one Sonu told the informant that she had to shoot those
scenes. Thereafter, Alisha gave the informant energy drink and after
taking it, the informant felt giddiness. In that situation, some nude
scenes were shot and after shooting she slept in the house of Alisha. It is
further alleged that on 31.12.2020, in the morning, she went back to
her house. She asked for her money and Rs. 30,000/ were transferred
by Alisha. On 28.01.2021, the friend of the informant sent her a
message and told her that the informant’s nude scene was circulated in
a link shared by him. He also sent her some screen shots. Therefore, the
informant started collecting the information from many others and on
01.02.2021, the informant contacted Alisha, but she blamed the
informant and stopped responding. It is also alleged that on
04.02.2021, the informant by taking legal advise downloaded the link
and saw her video which was shot at the bungalow at Madh and she
realized that she was cheated and she would be in serious trouble and
by going to police station she lodged report against the accused and
others.
3.
The applicant / accused claims bail on the ground that he
is innocent and he is also a victim and he was not aware about the
alleged nude videos. He also submits that on 03.12.2021 when he
received notice from the police in respect of the present crime, he
immediately rushed to Session Court, Dindoshi for prearrest bail. But
the same was rejected. Thereafter, he approached to Hon’ble High Court
but his prayer for prearrest bail was again rejected.He also submits that
the informant with malafide intention falsely implicated him in this
case. He further submits that the informant was well aware and also
having consent about the recording of the alleged video and she has
taken her amount for that purpose. The informant has also given shot
BA 7742022
:4 :
with other persons and also other videos are uploaded on the various
sites but no complaint was lodged by her. In the FIR, she herself
disclosed that he had done shooting for lesbian videos. Thus, the
informant falsely implicated him only with intent to extort money from
him. The applicant / accused does not have criminal antecedents. He is
having responsibility of his family. He is citizen of Maharashtra. Since
03.03.2022, he is behind the bar. The investigation if completed and
Chargesheet is filed. He also submits that he is ready to abide the
conditions of bail.
4.
The Prosecution has raised objection to grant bail by filing
Say. It is submitted on behalf of the prosecution that the accused is not
the permanent resident of Maharashtra. Other accused are in contact
with the accused. The offence is made out against the accused which is
serious in nature. If the accused is released on bail, then there will be
every possibility that accused will tamper with the informant and other
prosecution evidence. Therefore, the prosecution strongly objected for
release of Accused on bail.
5.
After going through the Prosecution case and argument
advanced, it appears that after taking energy drink, the informant felt
giddiness and in that situation, the applicant / accused committed
sexual intercourse with her for the purpose of shooting and thereafter it
was circulated on the web link. Primafacie, it appears that the
applicant / accused was well aware about the plan of recording nude
videos with the informant. Thus, prima facie, it is not seen from the
charge sheet that, he himself is a victim, otherwise he would have been
resisted for such kind of shooting and also he would have been
communicated to the informant that mischief was also played with him
BA 7742022
:5 :
just like the informant. It is primafacie seen that for the purpose of
making money, the accused exploited the informant under her
unconsciousness and record the videos. The offence is serious in nature.
Though the investigation is completed and Chargesheet is filed, prima
facie the material on record shows the involvement of the accused in
this crime. The Say filed by prosecution indicates that applicant /
accused is permanent resident of Bihar and he is residing in Mumbai on
rent only for the purpose of shooting of such kind of videos. Under such
circumstance, if the accused is released on bail, then there is every
possibility of his absconding which will create hurdle in the trial.
Considering facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail
and proceed to pass following Order :
ORDER
The Bail Application No. 774 of 2022 stands rejected.
(A. B. SHARMA)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Greater Bombay.
Date : 20.06.2022.
Dictation Typed on
Checked & Signed on
:
:
20.06.2022.
20.06.2022.
BA 7742022
:6 :
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER.”
21.06.2022 at 12.10 pm
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
(Y.M. SAKHARKAR)
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court SMT. A. B. SHARMA
room no.)
(C.R. NO. 39)
Date
of
Pronouncement
JUDGMENT/ ORDER
of 20.06.2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. 21.06.2022
on
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on
21.06.2022