XYZversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

2026:BHC-AUG:42005
                                                -1-
                                                                  937-BA-473-2026

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             BAIL APPLICATION NO. 473 OF 2026
                                          WITH
                          CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1520 OF 2026
                                     IN BA/473/2026

              Balaji Chintamani Kakde
              Age : 21 years, Occu. : Labour,
              R/o. Ektuni, Tq. Paithan,
              Dist. Chh. Sambhajinagar                          …. Applicant

                          Versus

              1.     The State of Maharashtra

              2.     X.Y.Z.                                     … Respondents

                                              .....
              Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Gautam J. Pahilwan
              APP for Respondent - State : Mr. D. J. Patil
              Advocate for Applicant in APPLN/1520/2026 (Asstt. To APP) : Mr.
              Swapnil Patunkar i/b. M/s. J. P. Legal Associates
              Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Ms. Neha Udawant (Appointed)
                                             .....

                                          CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                                   RESERVED ON : 9th SEPTEMBER 2026
                               PRONOUNCED ON : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026

              ORDER :

              1.          This is an application under Section 483 of the

              Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking regular bail in

              Crime No. 297 of 2025 registered with Pachod Police Station,

              Taluka Paithan, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, for offences

              punishable under Sections 333, 74, 107, 352, 351(2) read with
                                  -2-
                                                       937-BA-473-2026

Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 8

and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,

2012. The applicant, aged about 21 years, was arrested on 22 nd

July 2025. The charge-sheet was filed on 16 th September 2025. The

prayer is that he be released on bail pending trial.


2.         The prosecution case, stated briefly, is that on 18th July

2025 at about 2.30 p.m. the 17 year old daughter of the informant

was alone in the family house while the other family members were

at their agricultural field. Rohit, the informant’s nephew, states

that on hearing her cries he entered the house and saw the

applicant holding the child’s hand and covering her mouth. When

questioned, the applicant allegedly pushed him and escaped

through the rear kitchen door. Sachin, who arrived there, states

that he saw the applicant fleeing from that door and found the child

crying.


3.         The child is stated to have immediately told Rohit,

Sachin and, shortly thereafter, her father that the applicant had

entered the house through the rear door, forcibly caught her hand

with an improper intention and covered her mouth. Her father

then sent her with a relative to the field where her mother was

present. The mother states that, a little later, she noticed the child
                                   -3-
                                                         937-BA-473-2026

running towards a nearby well, followed her and saw her jump into

it. The child was removed from the well and taken first to the

hospital at Pachod and thereafter to the Government Medical

College and Hospital, where she was declared dead. The provisional

post-mortem    opinion   records     death   due   to   drowning.   An

accidental-death inquiry was registered on the same day. The FIR

came to be lodged on 21st July 2025 after the funeral.


4.         Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the

applicant is a young labourer with no criminal antecedents;

investigation is complete; nothing remains to be recovered; and his

further custody is unnecessary. It is urged that the FIR was lodged

after three days, that there is no suicide note or express act of

instigation, and that death by drowning by itself does not establish

the offence under Section 107 of the BNS. The statements are said

to be those of interested witnesses. Reliance is also placed on

WhatsApp and Snapchat communications to suggest that the

applicant and the child were acquainted and that the applicant has

been falsely implicated. Continued detention for more than one

year, it is submitted, would amount to pre-trial punishment.


5.         Learned APP, supported by learned counsel appearing

for respondent No. 2, opposes the application. It is submitted that
                                -4-
                                                     937-BA-473-2026

the victim was a child; the applicant entered her house when she

was alone; Rohit is an eyewitness to the act and Sachin saw the

applicant immediately fleeing; the child made an immediate

disclosure; and within a short time she jumped into the well in the

presence of her mother. According to the prosecution, this

constitutes a close and live link between the alleged act and the

suicide. It is further submitted that prior acquaintance or

electronic conversation cannot confer consent to a forcible act or

justify entry into the house. Having regard to the gravity of the

accusations and the applicant being a neighbour from the same

village, the prosecution apprehends pressure upon material

witnesses if he is released.


6.          The settled position is that abetment of suicide cannot

be inferred merely because suicide followed an unpleasant or

wrongful act. The prosecution must ultimately establish abetment

as defined by Section 45 of the BNS, including the requisite

intention, a positive act of instigation, conspiracy or intentional

aid, and a proximate and live link with the suicide. In Balaji

Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh and another reported in 2026 SCC

OnLine SC 602 : 2026 INSC 375, the Supreme Court reiterated that

generalized harassment, without clear mens rea, a positive act and

proximity, is insufficient. That principle must be kept firmly in
                                    -5-
                                                           937-BA-473-2026

view even though the present application concerns bail and not the

final determination of guilt.




7.          Equally, the Court at the stage of bail is not to conduct a

mini-trial or test the admissibility of every piece of prosecution

material as at the final hearing, or return concluded findings on

disputed facts. In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Anurudh and another

reported in 2026 SCC OnLine SC 40 : 2026 INSC 47, the Supreme

Court has reiterated that the bail Court considers the prima facie

material, the seriousness of the accusation, and the risks of

absconding, tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The

assessment which follows is therefore tentative and confined to the

present application.


8.          The   school   record     collected   during   investigation

records the child’s date of birth as 17th February 2008. Prima

facie, therefore, she was below 18 years on the date of the incident.

There is no material presently shown which displaces that record.

The POCSO accusations must consequently be considered on the

footing that the victim was a child, leaving the formal proof and

any permissible challenge to her age to the trial.


9.          The case is not founded only on vague allegations of
                                 -6-
                                                       937-BA-473-2026

earlier harassment. Rohit’s statement attributes him to direct

perception of the applicant holding the child’s hand and covering

her mouth inside the house. Sachin speaks of seeing the applicant

flee and of the child’s immediate condition. The father speaks of the

child’s disclosure made almost immediately, and the mother

speaks of seeing her run towards the well and jump. These

statements, read together with the provisional opinion of death due

to drowning, constitute a continuous and closely proximate chain

for the limited purpose of bail. Their truthfulness and evidentiary

value will be tested at trial, but they cannot presently be discarded.


10.        In case of Balaji Jaiswal (supra), in which the

allegations did not disclose the necessary direct and proximate

incitement. The material alleged here is materially different at the

prima facie stage. As deliberate forcible act against a child in the

privacy of her home is followed, within a short interval and after

an immediate disclosure, by the child running to the well and

jumping into it. Whether the applicant possessed the precise mens

rea necessary for Section 107 of the BNS and whether every

ingredient is proved beyond reasonable doubt remain questions for

trial. On the present material, however, it would be unsafe to hold

at the bail stage that a positive act or a live and proximate link is

altogether absent.
                                 -7-
                                                      937-BA-473-2026



11.         The electronic chats relied upon by the defence do not

presently form part of the prosecution charge-sheet. Their

authorship, completeness, context and authenticity cannot be

adjudicated in bail jurisdiction. Even if prior acquaintance is

assumed only for considering the submission, it does not by itself

establish consent to the specific act alleged by the eyewitness,

much less furnish a right to enter the house and use force upon a

child. The defence is at liberty to prove this material in accordance

with law at the trial.


12.         The delay in lodging the FIR is not, at this stage,

sufficient to discredit the prosecution case. The accidental-death

entry was made on 18th July 2025 and the FIR explains that the

father was not in a condition to lodge the report until after the

funeral. The final post-mortem report and forensic reports are not

part of the paper-book placed before this Court; however, the

provisional report records drowning and the mother and rescue

witnesses speak to the occurrence. The effect of any omitted or

subsequently produced medical or forensic material is for the trial

Court. Its absence from this bail paper-book does not efface the

eyewitness and contemporaneous material already referred to.


13.         The applicant’s age, absence of antecedents, completion
                                  -8-
                                                         937-BA-473-2026

of    investigation   and   prolonged     custody    are       substantial

considerations in his favor. They have been weighed against the

nature of the accusation, the direct prima facie material, the very

short temporal interval between the alleged act and the suicide,

and the fact that the principal witnesses and the applicant are

from the same locality. At this stage, the latter considerations

outweigh the former. Appropriate protection against indefinite pre-

trial incarceration can, however, be afforded by requiring the trial

to proceed on priority and by preserving liberty to renew the

request if the trial does not materially progress for reasons not

attributable to the applicant.


14.         In the result, the Bail Application is rejected.


15.         The learned Special Court shall give priority to the trial

and shall endeavour to record the evidence of Rohit, Sachin, the

informant and the mother of the deceased within four months from

receipt of this order, without granting unnecessary adjournments

to either side. The applicant shall cooperate with the trial. If those

material witnesses are not examined within that period for reasons

not attributable to the applicant, he shall be at liberty to renew his

application for bail, which shall be considered on its own merits

and in the light of the progress then made.
                                  -9-
                                                         937-BA-473-2026




16.         All observations in this order are prima facie and

confined to the decision of this bail application. The trial Court shall

decide the case independently, on the evidence led before it,

without being influenced by these observations.



17.         Fees of learned Advocate appointed to represent the

cause of respondent no.2 is quantified at Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

Thousand only) to be paid by High Court Legal Services Sub-

Committee, Aurangabad.



18.         In view of disposal of Bail Application, Criminal

Application No. 1520 of 2026 is also disposed of.



                                        (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR)
                                               JUDGE




Tandale