Mumbai, March 18, 2024 – The Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai has granted bail to Karan Sutpal Gangaboir, a 29-year-old resident of Mahim (E), Mumbai, who was accused in an alleged case of forced marriage and abduction. The bail order was issued by Additional Sessions Judge Dr. Gauri Kawdikar in Criminal Bail Application No. 363 of 2024, connected to Crime No. 242/2023 registered with the Dharavi Police Station.
Background of the Case
According to the prosecution, the complainant, a 21-year-old woman, lodged a First Information Report (FIR) alleging that she was deceived and taken to Madhya Pradesh under false pretenses, where she was coerced into marriage. The complaint states that on March 12, 2023, the accused, along with his wife (co-accused), allegedly lured the complainant with a promise of a well-paying role in which she had to pretend to be a wife for five days. She was subsequently taken to Madhya Pradesh and married off to a man named Mukesh.
The FIR further states that the complainant initially believed the marriage to be part of a role-playing job, but later realized it was a real marriage when she requested to leave, and her husband refused. She managed to contact a friend, who helped her inform the police, leading to the accused’s arrest on January 15, 2024.
Defense and Prosecution Arguments
During the bail hearing, the defense, represented by Advocate Ms. Vaidehi Pusalkar, argued that the complainant was not forced into marriage, as she had explicitly stated in the FIR that she was willing to marry Mukesh without any pressure. The defense further pointed out that the accused had no prior criminal record and was a permanent resident of Mumbai. Additionally, they emphasized that the co-accused, the wife of the applicant, had already been granted bail on January 30, 2024, in Criminal Bail Application No. 168/2024.
On the other hand, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Mrs. Meera Choudhari-Bhosale opposed the bail application, arguing that if released, the accused could influence the complainant and other witnesses. She also expressed concerns about the possibility of the accused committing similar offenses in the future. However, the prosecution acknowledged that the investigation was complete and that a charge sheet had been filed in the 12th Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, Bandra, on March 13, 2024.
Court’s Observations and Verdict
After reviewing the arguments and evidence, the court noted that the complainant, being 21 years old at the time of the incident, had willingly stated to Mukesh that she wanted to marry him. The judge observed that there was no indication of force or coercion used against her and that she had sufficient understanding of whether the marriage was real or not.
The court further pointed out that the role attributed to the accused was limited to accompanying the complainant to Madhya Pradesh and facilitating the marriage, for which he allegedly received some money from Mukesh. Since the charge sheet had been filed and no further investigation was pending, the judge found no justification for prolonged incarceration.
Bail Conditions Imposed
Granting bail to the accused, the court imposed the following conditions:
- The accused must furnish a Personal Recognizance (P.R.) Bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one or more sureties in the same amount.
- The accused shall not threaten or pressurize the complainant or any prosecution witnesses.
- The accused shall not commit any offense in the future.
- The accused shall not leave India without prior permission from the court.
- The accused must furnish his permanent and temporary addresses, along with his contact details, to the concerned police station.
- The bail must be executed before the Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court.
- Any violation of these conditions will result in the cancellation of bail.
Conclusion
The bail order in this case underscores the court’s approach to assessing allegations of coercion in cases of alleged forced marriage. While the complainant’s initial claims suggested deception, the court emphasized her voluntary consent in the FIR, along with the lack of direct evidence of force. The decision also highlights the legal principle that bail should not be denied solely based on the nature of the offense when the accused has no prior criminal record and the investigation is complete.
With the bail granted, the case will now proceed to trial, where the accused will have the opportunity to contest the allegations against him.