AKASH KRISHNA DESAIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

HEMANT                H.C.SHIV                                              907.BA1332.26.DOC
CHANDERSEN
SHIV
Digitally signed by              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
HEMANT                                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CHANDERSEN SHIV
Date: 2026.09.07
12:15:15 +0300                          BAIL APPLICATION NO.1332 OF 2026

                      Akash Krishna Desai                                        …. Applicant
                            V/s.
                      The State of Maharashtra & Anr.                          …Respondents


                      Mr. Shyam Birje with Mr. Prasad Avhad with Mr.Ganesh Lohkare
                      for the Applicant.
                      Mr. R. M. Pethe, APP with Mr.T. G. Khan, APP for the Respondent
                      – State.
                      Mr. Gaurav Mhatre with Mr. Vinit Jain for Respondent No.2-
                      victim.
                      Respondent No.2 present in person.
                      Mr. Ashutosh Chavan, API, Kashigaon police station present.



                                                   CORAM:        SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
                                                   DATED :       2nd SEPTEMBER, 2026
                      P.C. :-

                      1.         Present Application seeks release of the applicant on bail in
                      connection with C.R. No.507 of 2025, registered with Kashigaon
                      police station, Mira-Bhayandar, Thane for offence punishable
                      under Sections 351 (2), 64(2)(m), 69, 77 and 89 of the Bharatiya
                      Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “B.N.S.”) on the Report dated
                      12.11.2025 filed by Respondent No.2 (“the victim”).

                      2.         Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the record.

                      3.         The prosecution case is that, in November 2024 the
                      applicant and the victim came in contact with each other through
                      ‘Facebook’. Thereafter, they used to talk on phone and frequently
                      meet each-other. Gradually, they became friends. On 17.03.2025,
                      the applicant and the victim had gone for a party, where two
                      friends of the applicant had joined them. At that time, the

                                                        Page 1 of 6
H.C.SHIV                                            907.BA1332.26.DOC



applicant and his friends were having alcohol, therefore, the victim
wanted to go away. However, the applicant persuaded her to take
rest and therefore, she along with the applicant went to a lodge. It
is alleged that, there, the applicant forced her to consume alcohol.
Consequently, she lost her consciousness. When she woke up, she
found herself disrobed of the clothes on her person and realised
that the applicant committed forcible sexual intercourse with her
against her will. On being questioned, the applicant admitted the
said fact. At that time the applicant told her that he had taken her
objectionable photographs. It is alleged that on 04.04.2025, the
applicant took the victim at the same place and committed forcible
sexual intercourse with her repeating the same threat. It is alleged
that, consequently, the victim had suffered certain injury to her
genitals which forced her to undergo a surgery. Further, in June
2025, again the applicant had physical relations with the victim,
on the promise of marriage. Consequently, she became pregnant.
When she informed the said fact to the applicant, he refused to
marry her. Therefore, on 07.10.2025 she lodged a complaint.
However, she withdrew that complaint on the request of the
applicant and his assurance that he would marry her. Thereafter,
on 30.10.2025, the applicant and the victim had physical relation.
However, the applicant did not marry with her, therefore, on
11.11.2025, the victim tried to commit suicide by consuming
poison. Finally, on 12.11.2025, she filed a report leading to
registration of the aforesaid crime and the applicant came to be
arrested. On completion of the investigation, the police filed the
charge-sheet. The trial Court declined the prayer to release the
applicant on bail.

4.         Mr.Birje, learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that
considering the text of the FIR and the conduct of the victim, it is

                                 Page 2 of 6
H.C.SHIV                                            907.BA1332.26.DOC



apparent that it is not a case of rape but of consensual physical
relationship. The applicant is pursuing LL.B. Degree course and
his incarceration is posing an obstacle in his education. Therefore,
he prays for release of the applicant on bail.

5.         In reply, Mr.Pethe, learned APP for Respondent No.1-State
and Mr.Mhatre, learned Counsel for the victim submitted that in
her Report, the victim has categorically stated that on all occasions
when the applicant had sexual intercourse with her, it was against
her will and on account of the false promise of marriage and with
the threat that he will make her objectionable video viral. The first
such act was committed by the victim after causing her to consume
alcohol. The false promise of the marriage sent the victim in
depression and consequently, she attempted to commit suicide.
Therefore, there is a prima facie case against the applicant of
having committed this offence. Hence, the bail may be refused.

6.         I have considered these submissions. Admittedly, the victim
was repeatedly subjected to physical relationship against her will
and once she had become pregnant. Thereafter, the applicant had
told her that he would marry her after completing his education
and caused her to abort the child. Thereafter, the applicant refused
to marry her. Consequently, she filed a complaint against him
07.10.2025. She then withdrew that complaint on 24.10.2025 on
the request by the applicant and his promise that he would marry
her. Thereafter, on 30.10.2025 the two had gone to certain hotel
and had sexual intercourse because the applicant had expressed
regret and had promised to marry her. But on the very next day
the applicant refused to marry her. Therefore, on 08.11.2025, she
went to meet the Applicant and speak to him. On 10.11.2025, she
learnt that the applicant has filed a complaint against her.


                                 Page 3 of 6
H.C.SHIV                                           907.BA1332.26.DOC



Therefore, she also went to the police to file complaint. Therefore,
the applicant was called there and after negotiation by police, he
agreed to marry her. However, he did not. These facts indicate that
since the applicant’s education was incomplete he was not
prepared for the marriage and to take responsibility of the victim,
therefore, he could not marry. The victim was aware of the said
fact. Yet, she continued the relationship with the applicant. In this
background, prima facie it appears that the relationship between
the two was consensual. However, their relationship became
strained as the marriage was not possible and consequently, the
victim filed the report. In so far as the injury to genitals of the
victim is concerned, it appears that, it was her medical condition,
for which she had voluntarily undertook the surgery. Her attempt
to commit suicide is not related to the alleged rape because there
is no evidence of abetment of suicide.

           In Uday vs. State of Karnataka, reported in AIR 2003 SC
1639, the Apex Court observed that if a full grown girl consents to
the act of sexual intercourse on a promise of marriage and
continues to indulge in such activity, it is an act of promiscuity on
her part and not an act induced by misconception of fact. Section
90 IPC cannot be called in aid in such a case to pardon the act of
the girl and fasten criminal liability on the other, unless the Court
can be assured that from the very inception the accused never
really intended to marry her.

7.         In view of the above discussion and having considered the
material on record in the light of the said decision, in my opinion,
whether the applicant has committed this offence or not, is a
question of trial. The applicant is in jail since November 2025. His



                                Page 4 of 6
H.C.SHIV                                              907.BA1332.26.DOC



detention in jail will not serve any purpose. If released on bail, the
applicant is not likely to abscond and tamper with the evidence.

8.         In the wake of above, the applicant is entitled for bail.
Hence, following Order :-

           (i)    Applicant – Akash Krishna Desai be released on bail
           in aforesaid FIR bearing C.R. No.507 of 2025 registered
           with Kashigaon police station, Mira-Bhayandar, Thane, on
           his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one
           or two sureties in the like amount.

           (ii)   The applicant shall mark his attendance at Kashigaon
           police station, Thane on 1st and 16th day of each calender
           month, between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., till conclusion of
           the trial.

           (iii) The applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings
           before the jurisdictional Court unless exempted by the said
           Court, for the reasons to be recorded in writing.

           (iv)   The applicant shall not enter Dahisar area till the
           conclusion of the trial.

           (v)    The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
           evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon
           the prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing
           against him.

           (vi)   On being released from jail, the applicant shall
           furnish his contact number and residential address to the
           Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case
           there is any change.

                                      Page 5 of 6
H.C.SHIV                                               907.BA1332.26.DOC



           (vii) The applicant shall not indulge in identical activities
           for which he has been arraigned in this case.


           (viii) It is clarified that any observation made in the present
           order are for the purpose of deciding the present Bail
           Application and should not influence the outcome of the
           trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on
           the merits of the case.

9.         Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.



                                      (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)




                                     Page 6 of 6