Bombay High Court
RAVI MADHUKAR KAMBLEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The Court granted bail to the accused on condition of a personal bond and compliance with stipulated conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Ravi Madhukar Kamble, was charged under IPC sections 363, 376(2)(n), 496 and POCSO Act sections 3, 4, 5(1), 6 for allegedly kidnapping and sexually assaulting a 16‑year‑old girl, who was said to have a consensual love affair with him. The prosecution argued that the applicant was aware of the victim’s age and could abscond or intimidate witnesses if released. The defence contended that the victim voluntarily stayed with the applicant and did not raise any hue‑and‑cry. The trial had been pending for five years. The Court, after hearing both sides and reviewing the victim’s statement under Section 164 CrPC, found that the facts did not preclude bail and ordered the applicant to be released on a Rs 30,000 personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of attendance, non‑tampering with evidence, and no contact with the complainant or witnesses. The bail order was granted and the application disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged with kidnapping, rape, and offences under the POCSO Act involving a minor aged 16.
- Whether the alleged consensual relationship and lack of hue‑and‑cry affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 363, 376(2)(n), 496
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 3, 4, 5(1), 6
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- rape
- POCSO
- minor
- criminal procedure
- Section 164 statement
- personal bond
- conditions of bail
Judgment
35-BA-3102-2025 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3102 OF 2025
Ravi Madhukar Kamble … Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Shailesh Kharat a/w. Mr. Onkar Chaudhari, Advocate for the
Digitally signed
by SONALI
SONALI SATISH
KILAJE
SATISH Date:
Applicant.
KILAJE 2026.01.31
17:04:50
+0700
Smt. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for the Respondent-State.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 28th JANUARY, 2026.
P.C. :
1. By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in
C.R.No. 267 of 2021 registered with Pimpri Chinchwad Police Station,
Pune, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 376(2)(n), 496 of
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) and Sections 3, 4 5(1) and 6 of
Protection of children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short “POCSO
Act”).
2. It is prosecution’s case that the applicant kidnapped minor
daughter of first informant and sexually assaulted her on false promise of
marriage.
3. It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that there
Page 1 of 3
35-BA-3102-2025 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
was love affair between the applicant and victim. She herself came to the
house of the applicant. She stayed with the applicant for couple of days
but she did not make any hue and cry and requested to allow the
application.
4. It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for
respondent No.2 that at the time of incident, victim was 16 years old. The
applicant was aware about her age but he sexually assaulted her. If the
applicant released on bail, he may abscond or threaten victim and
prosecution witnesses. Hence, requested to reject the application.
5. I have heard both the learned counsel. Perused chargesheet
and documents produced on record. It appears from the statement of the
victim recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. that she had lover affair with
the applicant. She herself had gone to the city of the applicant. She stayed
with him for couple of days but she did not make any hue and cry. At the
time of incident, victim was more than 16 years old. The applicant is
behind bars for almost 5 years. There is no progress in the trial.
Considering these facts, I pass following order.
ORDER
i. The applicant be enlarged on bail in C.R.No. 267 of
2021 registered with Pimpri Chinchwad Police Station,
Pune, on executing P.R.Bond of Rs. 30,000/- on
Page 2 of 3
35-BA-3102-2025 (CR).doc
S.S.Kilaje
furnishing one or two sureties in the like amount.
ii. The applicant shall attend the concerned police station
as and when required.
iii. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or
attempt to influence or contact the complainant,
victim, witnesses or any person concerned with the
case.
6. The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is
accordingly disposed of. All pending applications, if any, disposed of.
7. It is made clear that the above observations are made only for
the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its
own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations
made in this order.
8. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…