YOGESH S/O RAMBHAU RATHODversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                  04-ABA-117-2026.odt

Harish



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

         ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2026

Yogesh S/o Rambhau Rathod                                ...Applicant

             V/s.
The State Of Maharashtra And Anr.               ...Respondents
_____________________________________________________________
Adv. Manikrao Wandkhade i/b Anil Palaspagar, Rahul Salve, for the
Applicant.
Adv. Prasanna P Malashe, APP for the Respondent – State.
Adv. D. J. Shegul a/w Vilas Bambarde, for the Respondent No.2.
_________________________________________________________
                 CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
                 DATE : 10TH SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :-

1.           Heard Advocate Manikrao Wandkhade, learned counsel for the

Applicant, Advocate Prasanna P Malashe, learned APP for the

Respondent-State and Advocate D. J. Shegul, for the Respondent No.2.


2.           The applicant has filed the instant application seeking pre-

arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 850 of 2025 dated 02.11.2025

registered with Kurar Village, Police Station, Mumbai for the offence

punishable under Sections 64(1), 64(2)(m) and 351(2),351(3) of Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 read with Sections 4(1) and 6 of

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
                                   1/5
                                                     04-ABA-117-2026.odt

3.          The First Information Report (FIR) came to be registered on

the basis of a report lodged by the respondent no.2 alleging that she had

known the applicant since they were relatives and when they met in

Mumbai, they started meeting with each other. She has alleged that the

applicant had told her that he loves her and on 24.09.2025, the applicant

called her to his room situated at Goregaon S. T. Stop and at that time

gave her a promise of marriage and established physical relations with her.

It is alleged in the report that the applicant repeatedly established physical

relations with the complainant and thereafter refused to marry her and,

therefore, she lodged the report.


4.          Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the

allegations of false promise of marriage are baseless since the applicant

had the intention to marry the complainant and the FIR was lodged on

account of some misunderstanding. It is submitted that the applicant has in

fact married the complainant on 19.05.2026 and the applicant and the

complainant are now residing together as husband and wife. Learned

counsel for the applicant also submitted that after considering the merits

of the matter, this Court had granted interim protection by order dated

16.01.2026 and the applicant has not misused the liberty and, therefore,

prays for confirmation of the interim protection.



                                     2/5
                                                    04-ABA-117-2026.odt

5.          In support of these submissions, learned counsel for the

applicant invited attention to an affidavit dated 03.07.2026 filed by the

complainant, in which it is specifically stated that the complainant is

major and that she was in a relationship with the applicant and further that

she has married the applicant on 19.05.2026 and both of them are residing

together. In the said affidavit, she has specifically stated that she has no

objection for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. Learned counsel

for the applicant also invited attention to the photographs showing the

marriage of the applicant with the complainant.


6.          As against this, learned APP has opposed the application. He

submitted that the offences alleged are serious in nature and investigation

into the offence is going on. However, as regards the contention that the

complainant has married with the applicant, learned APP submitted on

instructions from the Investigating Officer that the said contentions are not

disputed.


7.          Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 / original complainant

also submitted that the complainant has married the applicant and by

pointing out the affidavit dated 03.07.2026, he submitted that the

complainant has no objection to the confirmation of the interim protection

granted by this Court.

                                    3/5
                                                    04-ABA-117-2026.odt

8.         Perused the FIR and the documents placed on record,

including the affidavit dated 03.07.2026. It has to be noted that the

respondent no.2 is personally present in the Court along with her lawyer,

who has confirmed the contention that the complainant and the applicant

have got married.


9.         It has to be noted that the allegations in the FIR show that the

complainant and the applicant were having love relations. Although the

allegations are made by the complainant and the offence was registered

against the applicant, the subsequent development of marriage between

the complainant and the applicant cannot be ignored. Pertinent to note, the

complainant along with her lawyer is present in the Court and learned

counsel for the complainant has confirmed the contention that the parties

have got married and they are residing together.


10.        Having regard to the overall circumstances, the custodial

interrogation of this applicant need not be insisted upon. There is nothing

on record to show that the applicant has misused the interim protection

granted by this Court by order dated 16.01.2026. Therefore, the interim

protection needs to be confirmed, subject to certain conditions.


11.        Hence, I pass the following order.


                                    4/5
                                                    04-ABA-117-2026.odt

                           : ORDER :

          (i)    The Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.

          (ii)   In the event of arrest of this applicant in Crime

          No. 850 of 2025 dated 02.11.2025 registered with

          Kurar Village, Police Station, Mumbai for the offence

          punishable under Sections 64(1), 64(2)(m) and 351(2)

          (3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS),

          2023 read with Sections 4(1) and 6 of Protection of

          Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012,

          he be released on bail on furnishing P. R. Bond of

          Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only)

          with one solvent surety of the like amount.

          (iii) The applicant is directed to attend the police

          station as and when called upon by the investigating

          agency.

          (iv)   The applicant shall not pressurize any of the

          prosecution witnesses and shall extend cooperation

          during investigation and trial.

11.       Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed in

above terms.

                                    (PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)

                                    5/5