NITIN RAMKISHAN MASKEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2026:BHC-AUG:38161




                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1330 OF 2026

                                      Nitin Ramkishan Maske
                                           VERSUS
                           The State of Maharashtra and Others
           Mr. S. G. Kawade, Advocate for applicant
           Mr. S. B. Narwade, APP for Respondent-State

                                              CORAM       : R. M. JOSHI, J.
                                              DATE        : 19 August, 2026
           PER COURT :-


           1.         The Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with Crime

           No. 0239 of 2026, registered on 18.05.2026, at the Kotwali Police Sta-

           tion, District Parbhani for offences punishable under sections 78, 64 (2)

           (i), 79, 356-2, 356-3, 137-2 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for

           short ‘BNS’) and under sections 4 and 12 of the Protection of Children

           from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO’ Act).


           2.         The First Information Report lodged by the victim/respondent

           no. 3 who is minor, 16 years old alleges that she was residing at her

           maternal aunt's house in Parbhani for her education. While undergoing

           medical treatment for jaundice in January 2024, the victim came into

           contact with Applicant, who was a neighbor of her aunt. Thereafter, they

           remained in contact through phone calls, messages, and on social media.




           ABA-1330-2026.odt                                                   1 of 4
On 09.02.2026, the Applicant allegedly took the victim on his motorcycle

to an agricultural field near Loha, District Nanded, where he committed

sexual assault upon her. Subsequently, on 16.05.2026, the Applicant up-

loaded her photograph with a caption “Duniya Meri Mazi Bayko” on social

media i.e. Instagram to defame her publicly which led to the registration

of the FIR on 18.05.2026.


3.         Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the Appli-

cant has been falsely implicated in the crime without any admissible evi-

dence. It was highlighted that there is an unexplained delay in lodging

the first information report    as the alleged incident took place on

9.2.2026, photo uploaded on Instagram story is on 16.5.2026 and the

FIR was lodged on 18.5.2026. He submitted that since the investigation

is complete and the charge-sheet has already been filed, custodial inter-

rogation of the Applicant is no longer required. He further submitted that

the Applicant has no criminal antecedents, and personal liberty of the

present applicant may be protected. He further contends that arrest

would cause irreparable loss to      reputation and livelihood of the appli-

cant. The learned Counsel relied upon the decisions of the Hon’ble

Supreme    Court    in   Siddharth    V/s    State    of   UP   reported      in

(2022) 1 Supreme Court cases 676, Ashok Kumar V/s State of

Union   Terriotory Chandigarh          in   Special   Leave     Petition    No.




ABA-1330-2026.odt                                                          2 of 4
9949/2023 and Siddharth Satlingappa Mhetre V/s State of Ma-

harashtra reported in 2011 (1) SPC (Cri) 514.


4.         The Learned APP vehemently resisted the grant of pre-arrest

bail, pointing out that the victim was barely 16 years of age at the time

of the alleged incident, making her consent legally immaterial under the

POCSO Act. It was contended that specific allegations have been levelled

against the present Applicant regarding the sexual assault of the minor

in an agricultural field. It was further highlighted that the Applicant de-

famed the victim online by sharing her photo on Social Media platform

i.e. Instagram, therefore, his physical custody is necessary for recovering

his mobile phone, securing digital evidence, preventing misuse of data,

and collecting samples for DNA analysis.


5.         Perusal of the documents placed on record along with the

charge-sheet, the allegations against the Applicant are of a grave and

serious in nature involving sexual assault on a victim. In the facts of the

case it would be relevant that the victim is a minor, and the position on

the law of consent of the minor is settled now that the consent even

though consensual is legally immaterial. By sharing the victim’s photo-

graph on a social media platform constitutes online defamation and cyber

bullying which intensifies the seriousness of the crime. Once prima facie

involvement of applicant in crime and his conduct suggest that grant of


ABA-1330-2026.odt                                                     3 of 4
bail to him would be prejudice to the interest of minor victim girl, he

would not be entitled for relief.



6.            Prima facie perusal of the facts of the case indicate that cus-

todial interrogation is necessary for securing electronic devices and DNA

analysis. In case of X v.s State of Maharashtra and Another, (2023)

4 SCC 345 Hon’ble Supreme Court held that where the victim is a minor,

consent is legally immaterial under the provisions of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act.



7.    Accordingly, the present application is dismissed.




                                                       (R. M. JOSHI, J.)

B. S. Joshi




ABA-1330-2026.odt                                                       4 of 4