MUMBAI, INDIA – April 8, 2022 – The Sessions Court in Greater Mumbai has rejected the bail application of Javed Ahmed Shaikh, accused of rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Sonali P. Agarwal, denied bail in connection with C.R. No. 150/2022, registered at Santacruz Police Station.

The case involves allegations that Shaikh, who worked with the complainant at Acme Refrigeration Company, established a relationship with her under the false pretense of marriage. According to the prosecution, the complainant and Shaikh began chatting on WhatsApp, and he professed his love for her, promising to marry her after convincing his parents. Initially, the complainant refused his advances, but later accepted his proposal based on his assurances.

The prosecution alleges that, starting in February 2020, Shaikh and the complainant met frequently. During one such outing, he allegedly touched her private parts, claiming his actions were motivated by love and his intention to marry her. This pattern reportedly continued over several subsequent meetings at Santacruz Chowpatty.

However, on February 20, 2022, during an outing to the Gateway of India, Shaikh allegedly informed the complainant that his parents disapproved of their marriage and refused to give their consent. Despite her attempts to reason with him, he remained firm in his decision, leading the complainant to file a police report.

Shaikh’s defense, presented by Advocate Ayyub Patel, argued that the relationship was consensual and that the first alleged incident occurred in 2020, while the FIR was filed in 2022, indicating a significant delay. He also claimed that he never promised marriage to the complainant and that she, being an adult, was not deceived.

The prosecution, represented by APP Meera Choudhary-Bhosale, opposed the bail application, stating that the complainant’s statement under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) had been recorded. They also expressed concerns that releasing Shaikh on bail would allow him to pressure witnesses and obstruct the ongoing investigation.

Judge Agarwal, after hearing both sides, noted the serious nature of the allegations. The court observed that the prosecution’s claims suggested that Shaikh had deceived the complainant with false promises of marriage to engage in repeated sexual acts. The court also highlighted the prosecution’s assertion that the investigation was still ongoing and that witnesses’ statements were yet to be recorded. The court agreed with the prosecution’s concern, that the accused could potentially influence witnesses.

Considering the seriousness of the alleged offense and the incomplete investigation, the court concluded that granting bail would be inappropriate. Consequently, the bail application was rejected.

This case underscores the complexities of cases involving allegations of sexual relationships based on false promises. The court’s decision emphasizes the importance of protecting potential witnesses and ensuring the integrity of the ongoing investigation. The case will continue to be closely monitored as it progresses through the judicial system.