Bombay High Court

SHARIF MOHAMMED BAPU THOTTYLIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 4 March 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: N R BORKAR

Holding

The court denied anticipatory bail, holding that the seriousness of the sexual harassment allegations and the evidence of sexual overtures preclude the grant of bail.

Summary

Sharif Mohammed Bapu Thottyli applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest under Sections 75, 78, 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act for alleged sexual harassment, stalking and outraging modesty of a female athlete. The prosecution alleged that the applicant hugged, kissed, sent intimate messages and made sexual overtures while both were in Tirana, Albania. The applicant argued that the FIR was lodged after a delay, was retaliatory, and that the statutory ingredients of the offences were not satisfied; he also pointed to his cooperation with the investigation and an earlier interim protection order. The court examined the evidence, including WhatsApp/Instagram chats and a prior Division Bench order that recorded the victim’s testimony of harassment, and found the allegations serious. Consequently, the court refused anticipatory bail, holding that the nature of the allegations precludes release, and kept the earlier interim protection order in force for four weeks to allow an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the IT Act.
Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and alleged retaliatory motive affect the grant of bail.
Whether the seriousness of the sexual harassment and stalking allegations justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Application of the Supreme Court principles in Arnesh Kumar and Sushila Kumari regarding arrest and bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 75, 78, 79
Information Technology Act — s. 67

Subjects

anticipatory bail
sexual harassment
stalking
outraging modesty
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Information Technology Act
delay in FIR
arrest
Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

                                                              1-aba-1858-25.doc


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
              CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
       ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1858 OF 2025

Sharif Mohammed Bapu Thottyli                      …Applicant
      V/s.
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                    ...Respondents.
                             …………..
Mr. Rajiv Chavan, Sr. Advocate a/w Ms. Sonam Pandey, Adv. Asmi
Desai i/by. Adv. Sonam Pandey, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr.P.H. Gaikwad, APP for the Respondent/State.
Adv. Aadil Parsurampuria a/w. Adv. Aalam Parsurampuria and Adv.
Prashant Parsurampuria for the Respondent No.2/First Informant.
API Amit A. Tiwari, Kherwadi Police Station is present.
                             …………..
                           CORAM :           N.R. BORKAR, J.
                           DATE        :     04.03.2026.

P.C. :

1.       This is an application for anticipatory bail.

2.       The applicant is apprehending his arrest in Crime No. 307 of
2025 registered at Kherwadi Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 75, 78, 79 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act.

3.       It is the case of the prosecution that in June 2022, the Martial
Arts Training Centre run by the first informant and her husband
became associated with Mixed Martial Arts India Federation (MMA
India Federation) of which the present applicant was President. It
is alleged that in November 2023, while the first informant was in
Tirana, Albania, for International Mixed Martial Arts Judge/referee
examination, the applicant, who was also there, called her to his
hotel room on the pretext of reviewing certain presentation. It is

Dinesh S. Sherla                        1/4
                                                                 1-aba-1858-25.doc


alleged that after completion of the work, while the first informant
was leaving his hotel room at that time the present applicant
hugged and kissed her on cheeks. It is alleged that the applicant
thereafter started sending her repeated messages such ‘love you’
and ‘my sweet heart’. It is alleged that in one of the interactions
the applicant had said to the first informant that if she would have
been single, he would have proposed her. There are allegations of
inappropriately touching the first informant during various events.
The       allegations   against   the   applicant   are   thus   of    sexual
harassment, stalking and outraging the modesty of the first
informant.

4.       I have heard learned senior counsel for the applicant, the
learned APP for the respondent/State and the learned counsel for
the respondent No.2/first informant.

5.       Learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that there is
a delay in lodging the FIR. It is submitted that even if the entire
allegations are accepted at their face value, the essential
statutory ingredients of the offences invoked are not satisfied.

6.       The learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that in
2023 at the instance of the applicant disciplinary action was
initiated against husband of the first informant for assaulting a
senior coach in Albania. It is further submitted that certain
defamatory statements were made by the husband of the first
informant and thus the applicant was constrained to institute
criminal proceedings against him. The learned senior counsel


Dinesh S. Sherla                         2/4
                                                          1-aba-1858-25.doc


submits that the FIR is thus lodged as a counterblast to above
actions.

7.       Learned senior counsel for the applicant has drawn my
attention to the WhatsApp/Instagram Chats between the applicant
and the first informant to submit that false allegations are made
against the applicant. It is submitted that on 11 th July 2025 this
Court granted interim protection to the applicant and the
applicant completely cooperated with the investigation and the
investigation is substantially complete.

8.       Learned senior counsel submits that no arrest can be made
in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an
offences made against a person. In support of his submissions,
learned senior counsel has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar & Anr. 1 &
Sushila Kumari & Ors vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.2 .
9.       On the other hand, learned APP for the respondent/State and
the learned counsel for the respondent No.2/first informant has
drawn my attention to the order dated 18 th June 2025 passed by
the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (L) No. 16740 of
2024. It is submitted that the crime in-question came to be
registered pursuant to the directions issued by this Court. It is
submitted that this Court has observed that the messages sent by
the applicant demonstrate sexual overtures. It is submitted that
considering the nature of crime, the applicant may not be released
on anticipatory bail.
1    (2014)8 SCC 273
2    AIR 2020 SC 831

Dinesh S. Sherla                     3/4
                                                            1-aba-1858-25.doc


10.       I have perused the order dated 18 th June 2025 passed by the
Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (L) No. 16740 of 2024.
The relevant portion of the order reads thus:
          “5. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. ….
               …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. ….
          The said messages are inundated with sexual innuendos. A
          plain reading of the messages demonstrate sexual overtures
          being made by Mr. Bapu to the said woman athlete. During
          the course of the hearing, we noticed the presence of the
          woman athlete concerned who was crying in the Court. Mr.
          Parsurampuria informed us that the said lady was the
          athlete concerned. She had a story to tell.
          6. The woman athlete informed us that she was being
          sexually harassed and has suffered great anguish at the
          hands of Mr. Bapu. She was compelled to reply to his
          Instagram and WhatsApp messages and if she refused, she
          was threatened that she would not be permitted to
          participate in any sport of the Federation. We were also
          informed that the said athlete had made complaints
          supported with the proof of harassment including Instagram
          messages, etc. to various authorities, however, her every
          attempt was thwarted and she was left to run from pillar to
          post for redressal of her grievance. ….     …. ….
          …. …. …. …. …. …. …. …. ….”

11.      Considering the nature of allegations against the applicant, I
am not inclined to release the applicant on anticipatory bail.
Hence, the Application is rejected.

12.      On the request of the learned counsel for the applicant, to
enable the applicant to approach the Hon’ble Supreme Court
against this order, the interim order passed by this Court dated
11th July 2025 shall remain in force for a period of four weeks from
today.
                                               [N.R.BORKAR, J.]


Dinesh S. Sherla                      4/4

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…