Bombay High Court
VINAYAK DNYANU CHAVANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- Withdrawn
Holding
Bail was not appropriate pending investigation and the application was disposed of as withdrawn.
Summary
The applicant, Vinayak Dnyanu Chavan, sought regular bail in a case where he is alleged to have committed offences under sections 64(1), 87, 88 and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, involving a relationship with the prosecutrix, false promise of marriage, and alleged forced termination of three pregnancies. The prosecution argued that the allegations required a thorough investigation and that bail should not be granted before the charge sheet is filed. The Court examined the FIR and concluded that the seriousness of the allegations and the need for investigation precluded the grant of bail at this stage. The applicant’s counsel requested that the bail application be withdrawn, with liberty to file a fresh application after the investigation and charge sheet are completed. The Court accepted the request, directing that a fresh bail application may be filed before the trial court once the charge sheet is filed, and disposed of the present application as withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a case involving alleged sexual offences and forced termination of pregnancy pending investigation and charge sheet.
- Whether the allegations under sections 64(1), 87, 88 and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita necessitate a thorough investigation before bail is considered.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 351(3), 64(1), 87, 88
Subjects
- bail
- investigation
- sexual offences
- forced abortion
- false promise of marriage
- criminal procedure
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:37596
946ba1454-26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
946 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1454 OF 2026
Vinayak Dnyanu Chavan
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
...
Mr. J. M. Murkute, Advocate for the Applicant
Mr. S. D. Ghayal, Addl. PP for the Respondent-State
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
Dated : 18th August, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard learned Advocate for the Applicant.
2. The present application is for regular bail, in connection with
the crime wherein the offence alleged against the present applicant are
under sections 64(1), 87, 88 and 351(3) of the Bhartiya Nyaya
Sanhita. It is the case of the prosecution that the informant and the
present applicant were in relationship since 2022 and during the said
period, they had physical relations with each other. There is an
allegation at the behest of the prosecutrix that physical relationships
were maintained under the false promise of marriage. There is one
serious allegation pertaining to the prosecutrix getting pregnant on
three occasions and on all the three occasions, the allegations is that
the there was forced ermiantion of pregnancy.
3. After looking at the contents of the FIR, I was of the opinion
1 of 2
946ba1454-26
that the allegations needs thorough investigation and therefore,
pending investigation and pending of charge sheet, grant of bail will
not be appropriate. Upon showing disinclination, the learned Advocate
submits that the application may be permitted to be withdrawn with
liberty to file fresh application before the trial court after filing of the
charge sheet.
4. Request of the learned Advocate for the Applicant is accepted.
Liberty to file fresh application before the trial court after investigation
is completed and chargesheet is filed. If such an application is filed
before the trial court, then the same may be decided on its own merits
and in accordance with law.
5. The Application is disposed of as withdrawn.
(HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)
JPChavan
2 of 2
Checking your session…