1
BA No.1104/2024
MHCC020068652024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT GREATER BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO.1104 OF 2024
Vinayak Anant Bhoir
Aged 34 years, Occ. : Service,
R/at : Room No.22, Anand Utkarsh
Rahivashi Sangh, Hanuman Nagar,
Near A-1 Bakery, Goregaon (West),
Mumbai-400 104.

…..Applicant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Navghar
Police Station, Mumbai in
C.R. No.46/2024).

…..Respondent
Appearance :Advocate Ashok Mishra for the applicant.
APP R.V. Tiwari for the respondent/State.
CORAM : HHJ SHRI N.G. SHUKLA,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 29.
DATED : 07/05/2024
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
1.

Applicant/accused who is arrested in Crime No.46/2024 for
the offence punishable under Sections 376, 504 & 506 of Indian Penal Code
has filed this second successive application for bail under Section 439 of
The Code of Criminal Procedure. Prosecution filed say at Exh.2 and
victim/informant filed reply at Exh.3 and opposed the application.

2
2.

BA No.1104/2024
I have heard Advocate Ashok Mishra for applicant and APP R.V.

Tiwari for prosecution.
3.

As per allegations in FIR, informant and accused got
acquainted to each other on social media face-book in the year 2013. They
fallen in love and decided to marry after having financial settlement. It is
alleged that accused maintained physical relations with informant since
2014 and used to take the informant outside and he maintained physical
relations with the informant since 2014 till 2019. Accused had taken one
flat at Ambernath and used to take informant in the said flat to maintain
physical relations. It is alleged that, accused took her in the said flat since
2019 to 2023 and when informant asked him about marriage, accused was
giving evasive answers. Inspite, informant was opposing to maintain
physical relations until the marriage, accused forcefully maintained
physical relations with her against he wish and lastly on 04.02.2024. Prior
to one month of lodging FIR, when informant made phone call and asked
about marriage, accused refused to marry with her. Informant went at the
office of accused and he ran away from the office after looking her.
Therefore, informant lodged FIR alleging aforesaid facts on 03.03.2024.
4.

Advocate
for
accused
submitted
that,
investigation
is
completed and charge-sheet is filed and this is change of circumstance for
filing present application. He argued that, the physical relations between
applicant and informant are consensual. Prima-facie Section 376 of IPC
would not attract. Marriage with the informant could not taken place
because of the family members of informant and she would not want to go
against the wish of family members. Only to defame the applicant, in front
of his to be enlaws, false FIR is lodged. It is further argued that, now the
3
BA No.1104/2024
investigation is completed and charge-sheet is filed. Hence, further custody
of applicant is not required. Applicant is ready to abide any condition
imposed on him. Hence, advocate prayed to grant bail to applicant.
5.

Informant in person appeared and filed reply Exh.3 and
opposed to grant bail to the applicant. She made same oral submissions
when ask by this Court.
6.

Learned APP submitted that accused has committed serious
offence against the women. He had maintained physical relations with the
informant even when he was knowing that marriage between applicant and
informant cannot taken place. Thus, prima-facie Section 376 of IPC would
definitely attract against the applicant. If released on bail, he may
pressurize the informant and tamper the evidence. Hence, APP prayed to
reject the application.
7.

I have considered submissions and perused the record.

It
appears from FIR that, after falling in love, informant and accused had
agreed to perform the marriage after got financially settled. FIR discloses
that since 2014 till 2019, accused maintained physical relations with the
informant under pretext of marriage. It shows that, the consent for physical
relation was obtained under pretext of marriage. FIR and statements of
parents of informant shows that meetings were taken place between family
members of applicant and informant and due to some reasons, marriage
was not finalized. Hence, the initial physical relations cannot be said as
under false promise of marriage. Whether the subsequent physical relations
after they got clear that marriage cannot take place, were constitute the
rape is a matter of trial. Now the investigation is completed and chargesheet is filed. Trial will take much time. Hence, it would not be proper to
4
BA No.1104/2024
keep the applicant/accused behind bar for indefinite period considering the
facts and circumstances of the case. Condition can be imposed on the
applicant/accused to avoid threats or pressurizing to the informant. In this
view of the matter, I pass following order :ORDER
1.

Bail Application No.1104 of 2024 is allowed.

2.

Applicant/accused
Vinayak
Anant
Bhoir
arrested
in
Crime
No.46/2024 of Navghar police station be released on bail by executing PR
bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one or two sureties of like amount on following
conditions i.

Applicant/accused shall not contact in any manner and not to
pressurize or give threats to informant or any prosecution witnesses.
ii.

Applicant/accused
shall
not
leave
India
without
prior
permission of the court.
iii.

Applicant/accused shall not commit any offence while on bail
and breach of any of aforesaid conditions will be ground to cancel
bail.
3.

Bail in Jurisdictional Court.

4.

Bail Application No.1104 of 2024 stands disposed off accordingly.

Date : 07/05/2024
(N.G. Shukla)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil and Sessions Court,
Greater Bombay
5
BA No.1104/2024
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER
Name of Typist
Upload date and time
Name of the Judge
: Mrs. Shravanti Karre
: 07th May, 2024 (At 05.44 pm.)

H.H.THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
SHRI N. G. SHUKLA (C.R.No.29)
Date of Pronouncement of Order 07th May, 2024
Order signed by P.O. on
07th May, 2024
Order uploaded on
07th May, 2024