Mumbai, March 21, 2024 – Vinayak Anant Bhoir’s bail application has been rejected by the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay in a rape case. Additional Sessions Judge N.G. Shukla (Court Room No. 29) issued the order on March 16, 2024.

Bhoir was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 46/2024, registered at the Navghar Police Station, for offenses under Sections 376 (rape), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code¹ (IPC).

Background and Allegations:

The complainant alleged that she and Bhoir met on Facebook in 2013 and entered a relationship. They agreed to marry after becoming financially stable. She claimed that Bhoir had physical relations with her from 2014 to 2024, often at a flat in Ambernath. When she asked about marriage, he gave evasive answers. In February 2024, he refused to marry her.

Arguments Presented:

• Applicant’s Argument (Bhoir):
  • The relationship was consensual.
  • They had planned to marry but families disagreed due to religious differences.
  • Bhoir waited for four years (until 2023) for the marriage.
  • He informed the complainant he would marry someone else and fixed his engagement for March 3, 2024.
  • The FIR was filed on the morning of his engagement to harass and defame him.
  • The investigation is nearly complete.
• Prosecution’s Argument:
  • Consent was obtained under the false promise of marriage.
  • Bhoir continued the relationship despite knowing marriage was unlikely.
  • The investigation is ongoing, and the charge sheet is not filed.
  • Releasing Bhoir could lead to witness intimidation.
  • Relied on rulings from Delhi High Court and Supreme Court of India.

Court’s Reasoning and Decision:

Judge Shukla considered the arguments and the evidence. The court noted:

• The complainant and Bhoir agreed to marry after financial stability.
• Physical relations occurred from 2014 to 2019 under the pretext of marriage.
• Marriage talks failed in 2020 due to religious differences.
• Bhoir continued physical relations with the complainant in 2023, even after the failed marriage talks.
• Bhoir fixed his engagement with another woman.
• The court cited the Supreme Court ruling in “Anurag Soni Vs. State of Chhattisgarh,” where similar facts led to a conviction.
• The court found that Bhoir’s conduct prima facie attracted Section 376 of the IPC, as he continued physical relations under the false promise of marriage.
• The investigation is ongoing, and the charge sheet is not filed.
• Considering the seriousness of the offense and Bhoir’s involvement, the court denied bail.

Order Details:

The order was dictated and pronounced on March 16, 2024, and uploaded on March 21, 2024, at 5:02 p.m.

This decision reflects the court’s consideration of the ongoing investigation, the seriousness of the offense, and the evidence indicating that Bhoir continued physical relations under a false promise of marriage.