Bombay High Court
SHAHRUKH AKHATAR ANSARIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the accused with a cash bond and conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Shahrukh Akhatar Ansari, was charged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 for allegedly sexually assaulting a 16‑year‑old girl and threatening to publicise photographs. The prosecution highlighted the seriousness of the offences, the victim’s minor status, and the risk of the applicant influencing witnesses if released. The defence argued that the complaint was lodged after a seven‑month delay, there was no medical evidence, the applicant had no prior criminal record and had been in custody for over six months. The court considered the delay, lack of antecedents, and the absence of trial progress, but also noted the potential for tampering. Ultimately, the court granted regular bail on a cash bond of Rs.30,000 with conditions restricting contact with witnesses and evidence tampering, and ordered the applicant to appear as required.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving sexual assault of a minor under the POCSO Act and serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the seven‑month delay in lodging the complaint warrants denial of bail
- Whether the risk of the accused absconding or influencing witnesses justifies refusal of bail
- Whether the applicant’s lack of antecedents and prolonged pre‑trial detention favor bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 351(2), 64, 74
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 12, 4, 8
Subjects
- bail
- sexual assault
- minor
- POCSO
- delay in complaint
- criminal procedure
- evidence tampering
- surety
Judgment
5-BA-4782-2025.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 4782 OF 2025
Shahrukh Akhatar Ansari … Applicant/s
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondent/s
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Mihir N. Kasliwal i/b. Mr. Rahul Kasliwal, Advocate for the Applicant.
Mr. S. S. Pednekar, APP for Respondent No.1-State.
Mr. Pratik Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 4th MARCH, 2026.
P.C. :
1. By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in
Crime No. 279 of 2025 registered with Bhadrakali Police Station, District
Nashik, for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 74, 137(2) and
351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 8 and 12 of
the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2. It is prosecution’s case that the applicant sexually assaulted the
first informant by threatening to make viral the photographs taken by him
with her.
Digitally
signed by 3. It is contention of learned counsel for the applicant that there is
SHUBHADA
SHUBHADA SHANKAR
SHANKAR KADAM
KADAM Date: delay of seven months in lodging the complaint. At the time of the
2026.03.06
11:08:02
+0530
incident, the victim was 16 years old. There is no medical evidence about
Page 1 of 3
5-BA-4782-2025.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
sexual assault. The applicant is behind bars for more than six months. He
has no antecedents and requested to allow the application.
4. It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for
respondent No.2 that the first informant was minor. The applicant was
aware about her age. The applicant took selfies with the first informant
and by threatening her that he will make viral the selfies, assaulted her
sexually by taking her to lodge. If the applicant is released on bail, he may
abscond or threaten the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the
application.
5. I have heard all learned counsel, perused charge-sheet and
documents produced on record. There is delay of seven months in lodging
the complaint. The victim is more than 16 years old. The applicant has no
antecedents. He is behind bars for more than six months. There is no
progress in the trial. Considering these facts, I pass following order :
ORDER
(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No. 279 of 2025
registered with Bhadrakali Police Station, District Nashik, on
executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two
sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and
when required.
Page 2 of 3
5-BA-4782-2025.doc
Shubhada S Kadam
(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to
influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person
concerned with the case.
The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is
accordingly disposed of.
6. 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.
7. All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 3 of 3
Checking your session…