Mumbai, January 17, 2024 – Swapnil Santosh Patole, accused of rape and other offenses, has been granted bail by Additional Sessions Judge N.G. Shukla. The court cited the settlement between the accused and the complainant, and their impending marriage, as reasons for granting bail.

Patole was arrested in connection with Crime No. 672/2023 registered at Mulund Police Station, Mumbai. He was charged under Sections 376(1) (rape), 376(2)(n) (repeated rape), 417 (cheating), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Prosecution’s Case:

The complainant alleged that she was in a love affair with Patole since Navratri 2022. In July 2023, he allegedly raped her under the false promise of marriage, resulting in her pregnancy. When he refused to marry her, she filed a police complaint.

Defense Arguments:

Advocate Hema Kharvi, representing Patole, argued for bail.

Prosecution’s Stance:

APP Rashmi Tendulkar, representing the State, opposed the bail application.

Intervener’s Stance:

Advocate Vishwala Kadlak, representing the complainant, filed an affidavit from the complainant stating that she had settled the dispute and wished to marry Patole.

Court’s Observations and Decision:

Judge Shukla noted the following key points:

• Settlement and Impending Marriage: The complainant, present in court, confirmed the contents of her affidavit and stated that she intended to marry Patole.
• Major Parties: Both the complainant and the accused were adults.
• Arranged Marriage: Relatives of both parties had arranged their marriage for the following week.
• Detention Period: The accused had been in custody for two months.

“In view of these circumstance and as the accused is behind bar since last 2 months, he is entitled to be released on bail with conditions,” Judge Shukla stated in his order.

Conditions of Bail:

Patole was granted bail on the following conditions:

• He must execute a Personal Recognizance (PR) Bond of Rs. 25,000 and a surety bond of the like amount.
• He must not tamper with evidence or threaten the complainant.
• He must not leave Mumbai without prior court permission.
• He must attend the concerned police station as and when called and cooperate with the remaining investigation.

Implications:

This decision highlights the court’s consideration of out-of-court settlements and the parties’ intentions in sexual offense cases, particularly when marriage is imminent. The court’s decision reflects a pragmatic approach, recognizing the changing circumstances and the complainant’s desire to resolve the matter through marriage. The imposed conditions aim to ensure the accused’s compliance with legal procedures and prevent any further disruption to the settlement.