Mumbai, April 12, 2025 (Thane News Bureau): In a significant development in a recent criminal case, the Court of Sessions for Greater Bombay has granted bail to Istekhar alias Rahil Sainullah Khan, a 32-year-old businessman, who was accused of rape and other offenses. The order, dated March 18, 2024, was issued by Additional Sessions Judge Dr. Gauri Kawdikar in Criminal Bail Application No. 651 of 2024, connected to C.R. No. 148 of 2024 registered at the Wadala Truck Terminal Police Station.
Khan, a resident of Wadala East, Mumbai, was arrested on March 3, 2024, and was lodged in Taloja Jail. He was facing charges under Sections 376 (rape), 376(2)(n) (repeated rape), and 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The bail application was heard by the court, with Advocate Mr. Asif Naqvi representing the applicant/accused, Ld. Addl. P.P. Mrs. Meera Choudhari-Bhosale appearing for the State/Respondent, and Ld. Advocate Mr. Amreen Shariff representing the complainant/intervener.
During the proceedings, Advocate Naqvi argued that the First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by the complainant due to the accused’s failure to repay a loan she had extended to him. He contended that there was no physical relationship between the two and highlighted that the victim had even filed an affidavit in the Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court to that effect. Mr. Naqvi further submitted that the loan amount had since been returned to the complainant and that the continued incarceration of his client was unnecessary. He emphasized that the accused has no prior criminal record, is a permanent resident of Mumbai, and is willing to abide by any conditions imposed by the court.
The Ld. Addl. P.P. Mrs. Choudhari-Bhosale opposed the bail application, asserting the serious nature of the offense. She argued that granting bail could lead to the accused pressurizing the complainant, hindering the investigation, and tampering with evidence. She also raised concerns about the possibility of the accused absconding and not appearing for trial.
However, a crucial turning point in the hearing was the submission by Advocate Amreen Shariff, representing the complainant. She informed the court that the loan amount had been repaid and that the victim had filed an affidavit (Exh. 05) stating she had no objection to granting bail to the accused. The victim herself was present in court and was identified by her advocate.
Upon perusing the record, the court noted that the FIR indicated the complainant and the accused had met on Instagram. Between 2021 and 2022, the complainant had allegedly given a loan of ₹1,25,000 to the accused for his business. Their relationship reportedly evolved into a romantic one, with multiple instances of sexual intercourse at various locations. The FIR further stated that the accused had promised marriage to the complainant in the presence of her mother. However, on March 1, 2024, the complainant allegedly discovered that the accused was already married in 2016 and had two children. Subsequently, the FIR was lodged on March 2, 2024.
In her order, Additional Sessions Judge Dr. Kawdikar acknowledged that whether the sexual relationship between the complainant and the accused was consensual would be determined after a full trial. However, considering the complainant’s affidavit expressing no objection to bail and the fact that the accused had been in custody since March 3, 2024, the court deemed his continued incarceration unwarranted at this stage.
Furthermore, Advocate Naqvi for the accused and Advocate Shariff for the victim jointly submitted to the court their intention to file a Criminal Writ Petition before the Hon’ble High Court for the quashing of the FIR, a statement that was taken on record. They also filed a pursis (Exh. 07) confirming this intention.
The court also noted the absence of any prior criminal record attributed to the accused and his status as a permanent resident of Mumbai. To protect the complainant, prevent future disputes and repetition of any offense, and ensure the accused’s presence for trial, the court found it appropriate to grant bail with specific conditions.
Consequently, the court passed the following order:
- The Criminal Bail Application is allowed.
- The accused, Istekhar alias Rahil Sainullah Khan, shall be released on bail in Crime No. 148 of 2024 registered with Wadala T.T. Police Station for offenses under Sections 376, 376(2)(n), and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, upon executing a Personal Recognizance (P.R.) Bond of ₹50,000/- with one or more sureties of the like amount, subject to the following conditions:
- He shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses and evidence.
- He shall attend Wadala T.T. Police Station on the 1st and 3rd Sunday of every month from 10:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. until the filing of the charge-sheet.
- He shall not commit any offense in the future.
- He shall not contact the complainant, witnesses, and their family members directly or indirectly by any means until the conclusion of the trial.
- He shall not upload any video or photographs of the complainant on Social Media.
- He shall not leave India without the permission of the Court.
- He shall furnish his permanent and temporary address, if any, and his contact details to the concerned police station.
- He shall not change his residential address without prior intimation to the Investigation Officer and the concerned Court.
- Bail shall be furnished before the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate.
- Any breach of these conditions will entail the cancellation of bail.
The order was pronounced on March 18, 2024, in Mumbai by Additional Sessions Judge Dr. Gauri Kawdikar (Court Room No. 41).
This case highlights the complexities that can arise in relationships and the significant role a complainant’s stance can play in bail proceedings, even in serious offenses like rape. The upcoming Criminal Writ Petition before the High Court for the quashing of the FIR will be a crucial next step in this case.