Mumbai, Maharashtra – February 29, 2024 – Sandeep Kumar Pritam Yadav has been granted bail in a rape case registered at Deonar Police Station (C.R. No. 665 of 2023). The Additional Sessions Judge, Dr. Gauri Kawdikar, of the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay, approved Yadav’s bail application (Criminal Bail Application No. 67 of 2024) citing the claim of a consensual relationship, the filing of the chargesheet, and the absence of a criminal record.

Background of the Case:

Yadav was arrested and charged under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Allegations and Arrest:

According to the FIR, the complainant, who lived near Yadav’s aunt, alleged that Yadav proposed to her, and she accepted. On November 5, 2023, he allegedly established sexual relations with her in his room. She later became pregnant, and Yadav began avoiding her.

Defense Arguments:

Mr. Shubham Upadhyay, representing Yadav, argued that the complainant was his neighbor and knew he was married. He claimed their sexual relationship was consensual. He highlighted that Yadav had been in jail since December 21, 2023, the investigation was complete, the chargesheet had been filed, and Yadav had no criminal record. He also stated that Yadav was a permanent resident of Bihar with a local address in Govandi and was ready to abide by any court conditions.

Prosecution’s Counter-Arguments:

Mrs. Meera Choudhari-Bhosale, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP), and the complainant argued that the complainant became pregnant due to Yadav. They pointed to the toxicology report confirming sexual relations and argued that Yadav, being a resident of Bihar, might not attend the trial. They also claimed that he might threaten the complainant and witnesses if released.

Court’s Observations and Decision:

Judge Kawdikar noted that the FIR indicated the complainant had “fallen in love deeply” with Yadav and that the sexual relationship occurred on November 5, 2023. The toxicology report confirmed sexual relations. The court also acknowledged that Yadav was already married, raising questions about any promise of marriage.

“Whether the complainant had knowledge that the accused was married or not; in other words whether the complainant relied upon promise of marriage which was false, leading to sexual relations between them is a question of evidence and can be adjudicated only after trial. Taking into consideration that the stage of investigation i.e. charge-sheet is filed, no further investigation is to be carried out, there is no propriety in keeping the accused behind bars,” Judge Kawdikar stated in her order.

The court emphasized that the chargesheet had been filed, the case was committed to the Sessions Court (Sessions Case No. 168/2024), and no further investigation was needed. The court also noted Yadav’s lack of a criminal record and his temporary residence in Mumbai.

“To protect the complainant and ensure presence of the accused for trial, terms and conditions imposed on him while grant of bail. For the aforesaid reasoning in supra paras, it is found fit to grant bail to the accused by imposing certain terms and conditions,” Judge Kawdikar stated.

The court granted bail to Yadav, concluding that the concerns raised by the prosecution could be addressed through specific bail conditions.

Bail Conditions:

The court granted bail to Yadav, subject to the following conditions:

• He must execute a Personal Recognizance (PR) bond of Rs. 50,000 with one or more sureties of the same amount.
• He must not tamper with prosecution witnesses or evidence.
• He must attend Deonar Police Station as directed by the Investigating Officer until the trial is completed.
• He must not contact the complainant, witnesses, or their families.
• He must not upload any videos or photographs of the complainant on social media.
• He must not commit any offenses in the future.
• He must not leave India without court permission.
• He must provide his permanent and temporary addresses and contact details to the police and the court.
• He must not change his residential address without notifying the police and the court.
• Breach of any condition would result in bail cancellation.

Significance of the Ruling:

This ruling highlights the court’s consideration of the filing of the chargesheet, the claim of a consensual relationship, and the accused’s lack of a criminal record when deciding bail applications in rape cases. The court’s decision underscores that in cases where the investigation is complete and the accused has no prior criminal history, bail can be granted with appropriate conditions to ensure the accused’s presence and protect the complainant.

Key Factors in the Bail Grant:

• Filing of the chargesheet.
• Claim of a consensual relationship.
• Lack of a criminal record.
• Conditions to ensure Yadav’s presence and protect the complainant.

Future Proceedings:

The trial will proceed in the Sessions Court. The prosecution will be required to prove the charges against Yadav beyond a reasonable doubt. The court will monitor Yadav’s compliance with the bail conditions.