Mumbai, Maharashtra – May 25, 2022 – In a case that has thrown a spotlight on the increasingly complex intersection of marital disputes and technology, the Sessions Court at Greater Bombay granted bail to Gaurav Maruti Mahadik, who faces serious charges of unnatural sexual offenses, cruelty to his wife, and criminal intimidation. The ruling, delivered by Additional Sessions Judge Smt. Sanjashree J. Gharat, came amidst a contentious legal battle marked by allegations of secretly recorded intimate videos and public defamation.

The case, registered as C.R. No. 02 of 2022 at Worli Police Station, centers on a complaint filed by Mahadik’s wife, who detailed a pattern of alleged abuse and exploitation. The couple, married in 2017, faced a unique dynamic due to Mahadik’s work on a cruise ship, which kept him away for extended periods.

Allegations of Betrayal and Violation:

The complainant’s allegations paint a disturbing picture of marital discord. She claimed that on the third day of their marriage, she discovered Mahadik engaging in online conversations with a former girlfriend, discussing their physical relationship. This incident, she alleged, marked the beginning of a pattern of abuse.

According to the complainant, Mahadik subsequently demanded nude photographs and coerced her into watching pornographic videos, insisting she replicate the acts depicted. She further alleged that he repeatedly forced her into unnatural sexual acts, threatening divorce if she refused.

The most explosive allegation involved the discovery of secretly recorded videos. The complainant stated that she found videos of herself bathing and engaging in sexual intercourse on Mahadik’s mobile phone, recorded without her knowledge or consent. When confronted, Mahadik reportedly asserted his “right” as her husband to record such videos.

Adding to the complainant’s distress, she alleged that Mahadik posted images of her undergarments on his WhatsApp status, accompanied by lewd and suggestive captions, publicly humiliating her. She also expressed deep fear that he would disseminate the intimate videos.

Legal Arguments and Court’s Deliberation:

During the bail hearing, Advocate Vinay Kate, representing Mahadik, argued that the dispute was fundamentally matrimonial and civil in nature, emphasizing that the couple had initiated divorce proceedings by mutual consent. The defense contended that the criminal complaint was a tactic to pressure Mahadik into signing an incriminating affidavit. They also pointed out that Mahadik had surrendered his electronic devices to the police.

Conversely, Additional Public Prosecutor Kalpana Hire, representing the state, vehemently opposed the bail, citing Mahadik’s potential flight risk due to his work on a cruise ship. The prosecution also expressed concerns that he would tamper with evidence and intimidate witnesses. The complainant herself filed a written objection, detailing her fears and concerns.

Judge Gharat, in her ruling, acknowledged the matrimonial context but emphasized the gravity of the allegations. She highlighted the complainant’s “prima facie evidence” of apprehension regarding the misuse of the videos and the public humiliation caused by the WhatsApp posts.

The court noted that the fact that the chargesheet was filed, changed the dynamic of the bail hearing. Therefore the court decided to grant bail, but with very strict conditions.

Stringent Bail Conditions Imposed:

To mitigate the risks, the court imposed a series of stringent conditions:

• Mahadik was required to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 30,000 and provide one or two solvent sureties of the same amount.
• He was ordered to report to Worli Police Station weekly.
• He was prohibited from leaving India without court permission.
• He was required to provide proof of his residential address and identification.
• He was barred from engaging in any criminal activity, tampering with evidence, or intimidating witnesses.
• He was instructed not to contact or visit the residences of prosecution witnesses.
• A provisional cash bail was allowed for eight weeks.
• The prosecution was granted the right to seek cancellation of the bail if Mahadik violated any conditions.

Implications and Broader Context:

This case underscores the growing challenges posed by technology in domestic disputes. The secret recording and dissemination of intimate images represent a serious violation of privacy and can have devastating consequences.¹

The court’s decision reflects a delicate balancing act between the rights of the accused and the need to protect the complainant. The stringent bail conditions aim to ensure Mahadik’s compliance and prevent further harm.

This case is expected to generate significant public interest as it progresses through the legal system.