SAGAR TUKARAM HADKEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

                                                  924 ABA-2671-2026.DOC




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
          ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2671 OF 2026


Sagar Tukaram Hadke                                   … Petitioner
      Versus
State Of Maharashtra and Anr                          …Respondent


Mr. Ashraf Kazi a/w Mr. Tanmay Kate, Mr. Yash Suvana i/b Mr.
Vipul Dushing, for the Applicant.
Mr. Amey Prakash Sheth, for the Respondent No.2.
Mr. S.S. Ghag, APP, for the Respondent-State.
MR. Pramod Patil, PSI, attached to Bharati Vidyapeeth Police
Station, Pune City, present.


                        CORAM:      MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
                        DATED :     6th OCTOBER 2026
PC:-


1.        Heard Mr. Kazi, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant,

Mr. Ghag, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-State and

Mr. Sheth, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2.



2.        By this application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”), the Applicant is

seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R. No.439 of 2026

registered with Bharati Vidyapeeth Police Station, Pune City, Pune




                                  Page 1
AftabS.
                                                        924 ABA-2671-2026.DOC




for the offences punishable under Section 69 of of the Bharatiya

Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).



3.        It is the submission of Mr. Kazi, learned Counsel appearing

for the Applicant, that the Applicant has not committed any

offence. He submits that, in fact the marriage was fixed between

the Applicant and the First Informant and the date of marriage was

also fixed, the hall was also booked. However, thereafter due to

some differences of opinion the marriage was cancelled.



4.        Mr. Ghag, learned APP submits that offence is very serious

and therefore custodial interrogation is necessary.



5.        Mr. Sheth, learned counsel appearing for the First Informant

submits that, although the Applicant initially agreed for marriage,

however, Applicant refused to marry the First Informant as the

Applicant wanted to become PSI and as First Informant is having

less Salary the marriage was broken.



6.        The   Prosecution   case     and    reasons    for   rejection   of

Anticipatory Bail are set out in Paragraph Nos. 9 and 10 of order




                                     Page 2
AftabS.
                                                   924 ABA-2671-2026.DOC




dated 17th September, 2026 passed by Learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Pune. Which reads as under :-



                  9. Having heard both the learned counsel

                  and I.O. and having gone through the F.I.R.

                  and documents filed on record, it needs to

                  be observed at the threshold that the F.I.R

                  depicts that prior to talks of marriage in

                  between the family of applicant and the

                  informant the applicant/accused committed

                  sexual intercourse with the informant under

                  promise to marry her. Moreover, the F.I.R.

                  also depicts that initially the parents of the

                  informant were not ready for performing

                  her marriage with the applicant/accused but

                  any how she prepared her relatives for her

                  marriage    with      the    applicant/accused.

                  However, on 27/01/2026, 08/03/2026 and

                  05/04/2026         the      parents      of   the

                  applicant/accused        claim   dowry    amount

                  from the parents of the informant and




                               Page 3
AftabS.
                                                 924 ABA-2671-2026.DOC




               thereafter the parents of the applicant

               abused them in filthy words.



          10.      Apart        from      the        above     the

          applicant/accused as well as the informant

          have filed photocopies of WhatsApp chat,

          which prima facie reveals that there were

          chatting      in      between         informant      and

          applicant/accused prior to marriage wherein

          the     applicant/accused          claim    for    sexual

          relations with the informant. In the light of

          chat messages and the report, F.I.R., it prima

          facie reveals that prior to fixing marriage the

          applicant/accused            committed             sexual

          intercourse with the applicant under promise

          to    marry    her.    At    the     same    time    the

          investigation is at initial stage and the accused

          is absconding from the date of registration of

          F.I.R. and his physical interrogation is required

          for medical examination. In such mitigating

          circumstances with utmost respect, the ratio




                             Page 4
AftabS.
                                                    924 ABA-2671-2026.DOC




                   of authorities relied by the applicant/accused

                   is not coming to assist him for claiming

                   discretionary relief of anticipatory bail.



7.        Perusal of the record shows that, even as per the Prosecution

case the marriage hall was booked for performing marriage and

certain ornaments        were also ordered and thereafter, as Rs.

1,00,000/- dowry was demanded, some dispute took place and

therafter the parents of the Applicant informed that as the

Applicant wanted to become PSI he is not ready to marry the First

Informant.



8.        Although, the above is the case of the prosecution the

whatsapp chats which are annexed to the Anticipatory Bail

Application shows that, the First Informant has informed the

Applicant that she does not want to marry the Applicant. Said

whatsapp chats are from Page No. 97 to 102. There are further

whatsapp chats also. However, thereafter again the First Informant

has reiterated that her decision is final (Page No. 109).          Thus,

Prima Facie this is not a case whereby making false promise the

physical relationship was kept by the Applicant.




                                   Page 5
AftabS.
                                                     924 ABA-2671-2026.DOC




9.        Accordingly, the case is made out for grant of Anticipatory

Bail. In view thereof, the following order is passed:




                                ORDER

          (a)   In the event of arrest of the Applicant- Sagar Tukaram

                Hadke in connection with C.R. No.439 of 2026

                registered with the Bharti Vidyapeeth, Police Station,

                Pune City, the Applicant is directed to be released on

                bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of

                Rs.50,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the

                like amount.

          (b)   The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police

                Station once in 15 days on every Sunday between

                11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m. till filing of the charge-sheet

                and shall cooperate with the investigation. In

                addition, the Applicant shall attend the concerned

                Police Station as and when called.

          (c)   The Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and

                residential address to the Investigating Officer and

                shall keep the same updated, in case of any change




                                  Page 6
AftabS.
                                                    924 ABA-2671-2026.DOC




                thereto.

          (d)   The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any

                inducement, threat, or promise to any person

                acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade

                such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or

                to any Police personnel.

          (e)   The Applicant shall not tamper with the Prosecution

                evidence and shall not contact or influence the

                Complainant or any witness in any manner.


10.       The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.




                                             [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]




                                   Page 7
AftabS.