Bombay High Court
IRFAN MUNIR SHAIKHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court granted bail to the accused, finding no substantive evidence to justify continued detention.
Summary
The High Court considered the bail application of Irfan Munir Shaikh, who was charged under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 for alleged sexual assault on his minor daughter. The prosecution relied on the grandmother’s complaint, while the accused argued that he was falsely implicated and that the medical report did not support the allegations. The informant later filed an affidavit stating the complaint arose from a misunderstanding and expressed no objection to bail. The Court noted the lack of corroborative medical evidence, the informant’s change of stance, and the fact that the applicant was permitted to re‑apply after four months, concluding that continued custody was unwarranted. Accordingly, the Court granted regular bail subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged sexual offences against his minor daughter under the B.N.S. 2023 and POCSO Act, 2012.
- Whether the application constitutes a successive bail application and if any change in circumstances justifies its consideration.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 64(2)(f), 64(2)(m), 65(2), 74, 75(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 10, 12, 17, 21, 4, 6, 8
Subjects
- bail
- sexual offences
- POCSO
- father-daughter
- medical evidence
- successive bail
- misunderstanding
Judgment
902-BA-104-2026 (CR).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 104 OF 2026
Irfan Munir Shaikh
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra And Ors.
...
Mr. Somnath Thengal a/w Mr. Amol Kanaki, for Applicant.
Mr. Nitin. B. Patil, APP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Rahul Khot a/w Mr. Dilip Shinde, for Respondent No.3.
...
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
DATE : 18th MARCH, 2026.
P. C. :
1. The applicant seeks regular bail in connection with C.R. No.
113 of 2025 dated 31.01.2025 registered with Karad City Police
Station, District Satara for the offences punishable under Sections
64(2)(f), 64(2)(m), 65(2), 74, 75(1) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and Sections 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 17 and 21 of the Protection of
Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2. The prosecution case is that the informant is the grandmother
of victim. The accused/applicant, being the father of victim,
knowingly exploited her between the year 2022 and December 2024
Digitally
signed by
SAJAKALI
and repeatedly subjected the minor victim to forcible physical
SAJAKALI LIYAKAT
LIYAKAT JAMADAR
JAMADAR Date:
2026.03.18
18:35:29
+0530
Sajakali Jamadar 1 of 5
902-BA-104-2026 (CR).doc
relations against her will and further issued death threats. It is
further alleged that when the victim informed her mother, the
mother failed to acknowledge the same. Subsequently, on 19 th
January 19, 2025, at the informant’s residence, the accused again
approached the victim committed sexual assault. Hence, the FIR.
3. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant
is the father of the victim and has been falsely implicated due to a
misunderstanding. It is further submitted that the medical report
does not substantiate the allegations levelled by the prosecution.
Considering that the investigation is complete and the charge-sheet
has been filed, further custody of the Applicant is unwarranted.
4. Per contra, the learned APP vehemently opposed the
application, submitting that the Applicant is involved in the offence
against his own daughter and, therefore, the case does not warrant
consideration for grant of bail. It is further submitted that the
present application is a successive bail application and, in the
absence of any change in circumstances, the application is liable to
be dismissed.
5. Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 3/Informant submits that
the present crime was registered due to a misunderstanding and
Sajakali Jamadar 2 of 5
902-BA-104-2026 (CR).doc
that the Informant has given no objection for the release of the
Applicant on bail.
6. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the
respective parties and upon perusal of the record, including the
charge-sheet, indicates that the Informant/grandmother of the
victim allegedly noticed for over a period of one year certain
abnormalities in the behaviour and walking style of the victim on
the date of the incident when the report was lodged, casts a
material doubt on the reliability of the allegations.
7. Prima facie, the prosecution case is not supported by the
medical examination report of the victim. Moreover, the Informant
has filed an affidavit stating that the complaint was lodged out of a
misunderstanding.
8. So far as the objection regarding the present application being
a successive bail application is concerned, this Court had granted
liberty to the present Applicant to approach this Court after the
lapse of four months.
9. In view of the aforesaid observations and in light of the no
objection given by Respondent No.3/Informant, I am inclined to
exercise discretion in favour of the Applicant.
Sajakali Jamadar 3 of 5
902-BA-104-2026 (CR).doc
10. Hence, the following order :
ORDER
I) The bail application is allowed.
II) Applicant - Irfan Munir Shaikh be released on bail, on
furnishing P.R. bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand)
with one or two local solvent sureties, in the like amount, in
connection with C.R. No. 113 of 2025 dated 31.01.2025 registered
with Karad City Police Station, District Satara for the offences
punishable under Sections 64(2)(f), 64(2)(m), 65(2), 74, 75(1) of
the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 17
and 21 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act,
2012, on the following conditions :-
(a) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution
witnesses and tamper with the prosecution evidence, in
any manner.
(b) The applicant shall attend the trial on each and
every date unless exempted by the trial Court.
(c) The applicant shall submit Aadhar and Pan Cards to
the Investigating Officer and detailed address and phone
numbers and two of the near relatives.
Sajakali Jamadar 4 of 5
902-BA-104-2026 (CR).doc
(d) In case of breach of any of the conditions by the
applicant, it is open for the Prosecution to approach the
concerned Court seeking cancellation of bail,
notwithstanding the fact that this Court has granted bail.
(e) It is clarified that in the interest of justice and under
any eventuality, the applicant shall be at liberty to
approach the trial Court for the relaxation of any of the
aforesaid conditions.
III) Needless to state that the observations rendered herein are to
the extent of this application and the trial Court shall not be
influenced by the same.
[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.]
Sajakali Jamadar 5 of 5
Checking your session…