Mumbai, February 22, 2022 — The Sessions Court at Greater Mumbai, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Smt. Sanjashree J. Gharat, has granted bail to Akash Ramesh Umap, the accused in a rape case registered under sections 376 and 376(2)(N) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The bail application, numbered 148 of 2022, was heard on February 21, 2022, following which the court ordered Umap’s release on a personal bond of ₹30,000 with one or more solvent sureties of the same amount.
Case Background
The case stems from a complaint lodged by a woman who alleged that she became acquainted with the accused, Akash Ramesh Umap, in November 2019 through a mutual friend, Reshma Dayalkar. According to the First Information Report (FIR), in May 2020, the accused called the complainant to his house under the false pretext that Reshma was seriously ill. Upon arrival, the complainant discovered that Reshma was not present. The accused allegedly admitted to lying about the situation before gagging the complainant’s mouth, issuing threats, and sexually assaulting her.
The complainant, fearing repercussions, did not disclose the incident initially. Subsequently, the accused reportedly contacted her again, apologized, and promised to marry her. Believing his assurances, the complainant continued her relationship with him. However, when she later became pregnant, the accused allegedly refused to marry her, prompting her to file a formal complaint.
Defense and Prosecution Arguments
Advocate Anil Bansode, representing the accused, argued that his client was falsely implicated in the case. The defense contended that the complainant and the accused were in a consensual relationship and had plans to marry. However, due to objections from the complainant’s family, the relationship faced hurdles, leading to the complaint being filed. The defense further submitted that both parties had resolved their differences and that the complainant had executed an affidavit stating that she had no objection to the accused being granted bail.
On the other hand, Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Kalpana Hire opposed the bail plea, asserting that the investigation was still ongoing. The prosecution expressed concerns that if the accused were released, he might tamper with evidence or intimidate prosecution witnesses.
Court’s Observations and Order
After reviewing the case details, the court acknowledged that the complainant and the accused had a prolonged relationship and that the complainant had stated her lack of objection to the accused’s bail. The judge observed that the allegations primarily revolved around an alleged breach of promise to marry rather than an outright act of sexual assault. Given these circumstances, the court found it appropriate to grant bail, subject to stringent conditions.
The court issued the following directives:
- The accused must visit the Worli Police Station every Monday between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM until the conclusion of the trial.
- He is prohibited from leaving Maharashtra without prior court permission.
- He must submit proof of residence, phone number, Aadhaar card, and voter ID.
- He must refrain from engaging in any criminal activities, failing which his bail may be revoked.
- He must not tamper with prosecution evidence or contact prosecution witnesses directly or indirectly.
- He must attend all court proceedings without fail.
- He is strictly prohibited from visiting locations where prosecution witnesses reside.
- Any violation of the bail conditions would permit the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.
- A provisional cash bail option is granted for eight weeks.
Legal Implications and Next Steps
The ruling underscores the judiciary’s balanced approach to bail applications, particularly in cases involving allegations of sexual assault where the complainant later expresses a desire to withdraw or modify claims. The case will continue to be monitored as the trial progresses, and the accused remains bound by the conditions set forth by the court.
Legal experts suggest that while the court’s order takes into account the evolving nature of the complainant’s stance, the trial will ultimately determine the veracity of the allegations. The prosecution retains the right to present evidence and argue its case, while the accused remains under judicial scrutiny.
With the trial yet to commence, all eyes remain on further legal developments in the matter.
