Bombay High Court
NIZAMUDDIN SHAMSHUDDIN ANSARIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application with specified conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Nizamuddin Ansari, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 64(2)(m), 69, 115(2) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging that the complainant had a consensual relationship with him based on a false promise of marriage. The complainant, a married woman with four children, alleged that the applicant had forced sexual relations since July 2021, while the applicant contended that the relationship was consensual, documented by a live‑in agreement, and that the complainant was blackmailing him. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the sexual offences and the need for the applicant’s custody for a medical examination, also alleging that the applicant was pressuring the complainant to withdraw the complaint. The Court examined the FIR, noted the long‑standing consensual nature of the relationship, the filing of a charge‑sheet, and the absence of any prior grievance by the complainant. It held that anticipatory bail could be granted subject to conditions including a personal bond, restriction from the complainant’s jurisdiction, non‑contact with witnesses, and compliance with medical examination requirements. The interim protection order previously granted was confirmed with these conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a case involving alleged sexual offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the consensual nature of the alleged relationship and the filing of a charge‑sheet negate the need for custodial interrogation.
- Whether conditions such as a personal bond, restriction from the complainant’s residence, and prohibition on contacting witnesses are appropriate to prevent tampering with evidence.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 351(2), 64(2)(m), 69
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- sexual offences
- false promise of marriage
- consensual relationship
- medical examination
- interim protection order
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- bail conditions
Judgment
18-ABA-1908-2026
Harish
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1908 OF 2026
Nizamuddin Sahmshuddin Ansari ...Applicant
V/s.
The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. ...Respondents
_____________________________________________________________
Adv. Sharan Bhagat, for the Applicant.
Adv. Ashok S. Gawai, APP for the Respondent – State.
Adv. Rupli Akolkar, for the Respondent No.2
PSI – Mr. Sham Atpalkar, Ulhasnagar Police Station is present.
________________________________________________________
CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
DATE : 31ST AUGUST, 2026.
P.C. :-
1. Heard learned Advocate Sharan Bhagat, for the applicant
as well as Advocate Ashok S. Gawai, learned APP, for the respondent
and Respondent No.2.
2. The applicant has filed the instant application seeking pre-
arrest bail in Crime No. 255 of 2026 dated 03.06.2026, registered with
Ulhasnagar Police Station, Thane (City) for the offence punishable
under Sections 64(2)(m), 69, 115(2) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
1/5
18-ABA-1908-2026
3. The First Information Report is registered on the basis of a
report lodged by the complainant alleging that since July, 2021, the
accused has established sexual relations with her on false promise of
marriage and has therefore committed the alleged offences.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the
complainant is a married lady with four children and had engaged in
consensual relations with this applicant. He submitted that this applicant is
also a married person and there was no question of any promise of
marriage. He submitted that the parties had executed a document of live-
in-relationship and as such the allegations about rape are without any
basis. He also submitted that in fact this applicant has lodged several
reports against the complainant by pointing out her blackmailing tactics
and has pointed out her similar complaints against other persons. He also
submitted that considering the nature of allegations, this applicant has
already extended cooperation and in accordance with interim protection
order dated 21st July, 2026 has attended the police station. He therefore
prayed for confirmation of interim protection.
5. As against this, learned APP as well as learned counsel for
the respondent no.2 made submissions and opposed the application. They
submitted that the offence is serious in nature and custody of the applicant
is required for his medical examination, the offence being a sexual
offence. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the
2/5
18-ABA-1908-2026
applicant has repeatedly pressurized her to withdraw the complaint and in
this regard non-congnizable offences have been registered against the
applicant on 27th July, 2026 and 29th July, 2026. In view of this, the
application for anticipatory bail is opposed.
6. Perused the FIR and the documents placed on record. It has
to be noted that the complainant has made allegations about forceful
sexual relations since July, 2021. The offence is registered in 2026 with
respect to the alleged incidences of July, 2021. On perusal of the
allegations in the report it becomes clear that the complainant as well as
the applicant were already married and since the complainant has never
raised any grievance, the relations appear to be consensual in nature. It has
also to be noted that charge-sheet is already filed and considering the
nature of offence there is no question of any recovery from this applicant.
The applicant can be directed to present himself for medical examination.
7. As regards the allegations about pressure to withdraw the
report, it has to be noted that the complainant has not filed any complaint
during the period of five years when there were consensual relations in
between the parties. The allegations about exerting pressure upon the
complainant can be taken care of by directing the applicant to stay away
from the place of the residence of the complainant.
8. Considering the nature of allegations and the fact that the
3/5
18-ABA-1908-2026
complainant and applicant where in consensual relations for more than
five years and further considering the fact that the charge-sheet is already
filed, the interim protection granted by this Court needs to be confirmed,
subject to certain conditions.
14. Hence, I pass following order :
: ORDER :
(i) The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
(ii) In the event of arrest of the applicant in
Crime No. 255 of 2026 dated 03.06.2026,
registered with Ulhasnagar Police Station,
Thane (City) for the offence punishable under
Sections 64(2)(m), 69, 115(2) and 351(2) of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, 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 shall not enter the jurisdiction
in which the complainant is residing, without
intimation to the Investigating Officer.
4/5
18-ABA-1908-2026
(iv) The applicant shall not contact or pressurize
any of the prosecution witnesses.
(v) The applicant shall present himself for
medical examination as and when called upon by
the Investigating Agency.
16. The anticipatory bail application is allowed in above terms.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)
5/5
Checking your session…