Bombay High Court
YUVRAJ RATAN MOREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
Bail is granted to the applicant subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Yuvraj Ratan More, sought bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Crime No. 679 of 2024, which alleged kidnapping under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant had previously been granted bail in a first FIR (No.31 of 2024) involving offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and the Indian Penal Code, 1860, but was re‑arrested after a second FIR was lodged. The defence relied on a statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. wherein the complainant voluntarily accompanied the applicant and denied any assault, arguing that this diluted the kidnapping charge. The court, after giving the prosecution an opportunity to challenge the statement, held that the material on record established a prima facie case for bail. Consequently, bail was granted subject to a set of conditions, with the court expressly reserving its right to address the merits of the case at trial.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting bail to the accused under Sections 439 CrPC and 483 BNSS 2023 in light of the statement under Section 164 CrPC?
- Does the voluntary accompaniment of the complainant, as per the Section 164 statement, dilute the charges under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- section 164 statement
- double FIR
- conditions of bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
33.BA.3297.2026.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.3297 OF 2026
Yuvraj Ratan More .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Ms. Sana Raees Khan a/w. Mr. Jinay Jain and Mr. Devanand
Bhosale, Advocates for Applicant.
Ms. Rajeshree V. Newton, APP for Respondent.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 01, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Ms. Khan, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms.
Newton, learned APP for Respondent.
2. This is an Application under Section 439 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) / Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R.
No.679 of 2024 registered with Sinnar Police Station, Nashik for
offences punishable under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. On 29.08.2026, after hearing learned Advocate and learned
APP the following order was passed:-
“1. Heard Ms. Khan, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms.
Newton, learned APP for Respondent.
2. The Applicant is indicted by virtue of a second First
Information Report (for short ‘FIR’) filed by the prosecution, bearing
1 of 5
33.BA.3297.2026.doc
No.679 of 2024 for offences of kidnapping under Section 137(2) and
Section 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. In so far as the first FIR No.31 of 2024 is concerned,
though the Applicant was enacted in offences related to Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and other grievous offences
under Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Applicant has been enlarged on
bail already, copy of which is appended at page No.93. I have
perused the same.
4. Ms. Khan persuades the Court to consider the statement
recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
of the prosecutrix, copy of which is appended at page Nos.45 to 47 of
the Application, which prima facie states that the Complainant had
on her own volition accompanied the Applicant and he has not
assaulted her at all. I have perused the said statement.
5. Arguable case prima facie has been clearly made out by
the Ms. Khan for grant of bail. However, since the statements have
been made across the bar, I give one opportunity to the prosecution
to examine the veracity of the aforesaid statements and apprise the
Court accordingly.
6. Stand over to 01st September, 2026. To be placed under
the caption ‘First on Board’. To be treated as ‘Part-Heard’.”
4. It is prima facie seen and it emanates from the record, that in
the first First Information Report (for short ‘FIR’) No.31 of 2024, the
Applicant has already been enlarged on bail. It is only after the
supplementary statement was recorded that a second FIR, enhancing
the charges to the extent of the Applicant having kidnapped the
prosecutrix has been foisted and the Applicant has been re-arrested
thereafter, on 19.09.2024.
5. The second FIR, prima facie emanates from the charges in
the first FIR. The issue which is prima facie, intriguing is the statement
recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. of the proxecutrix which is
appended at page No.45 onwards in the present Application.
6. I have already perused the same and opined in paragraph
2 of 5
33.BA.3297.2026.doc
No.4 of the aforesaid order. The aforesaid prima facie observations
and more specifically, the statement of the prosexutrix herself of she
having on her own volition accompanied the Applicant dilutes the
charge under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 altogether.
7. Nevertheless, it is my prima facie opinion that on the basis of
the material made available before me, which is referred to and
alluded to hereinabove, the Applicant has made out a case for grant of
trial.
8. Considering the aforesaid, Applicant is granted bail subject
to following conditions:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released
from prison in connection with Crime No. 679 of
2024;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty
Thousand only) with one or two sureties of the
like amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer
at the concerned Police Station, once every month
on the first Monday of the month between 10:00
a.m. to 12:00 p.m.;
3 of 5
33.BA.3297.2026.doc
(iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial
and attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless
specifically exempted and will not take any
unnecessary adjournments, if he does so it will
entitle the prosecution to apply for revocation of
this order;
(v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses
or tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer
informed of his current address and mobile
contact number and / or change of residence or
mobile details, if any, from time to time, as
applicable; and
(viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail
cancellation of bail granted to the Applicant.
9. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are
limited for the purpose of granting Bail only and I have not made any
observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on
the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being
uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made
4 of 5
33.BA.3297.2026.doc
hereinabove in this order.
10. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
HARSHADA by HARSHADA
HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date: 2026.09.02
11:00:04 +0530
5 of 5
Checking your session…