Bombay High Court
SHYAM SHANTARAM THORATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SHIVKUMAR DIGE
Holding
Bail was granted to the applicant subject to a personal bond of Rs.25,000, sureties, and conditions prohibiting witness tampering.
Summary
The High Court considered a bail application filed by Shyam Shantaram Thorat, who was charged under Sections 64, 74, 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 for allegedly sexually assaulting a 17‑year‑old girl in his car. The applicant claimed he was falsely implicated as retaliation for a complaint he lodged against the local police. The prosecution argued that the offence was serious, the victim was a minor, and the applicant might abscond or tamper with witnesses. After hearing counsel and reviewing the charge‑sheet, the court held that bail could be granted provided a personal bond of Rs.25,000 with sureties and strict conditions not to influence evidence or witnesses. The trial court was directed to continue the trial on its merits without prejudice from the bail order.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving alleged sexual assault of a minor under BNS and POCSO provisions.
- Whether the applicant poses a risk of absconding or tampering with witnesses.
- Whether the applicant's claim of false implication due to a prior police complaint affects the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 64, 74, 75
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 12, 4, 6, 8
Subjects
- bail
- sexual assault
- minor
- POCSO
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- witness tampering
- false implication
- criminal procedure
Judgment
20-BA-606-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 606 OF 2026
Shyam Shantaram Thorat ...Applicant
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ...Respondents
NILAM
Digitally signed
by NILAM
____________________________________________________________
SANTOSH
SANTOSH KAMBLE
KAMBLE Date: 2026.04.30
15:06:48 +0530 Mr.Sanjiv Sawant a/w Mr.Samir Suryawanshi and Ms.Bhakti Wast, for the
Applicant.
Ms.R.D. Humane, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr.Harshwardhan M. Pawar, for Respondent No.2.
Mr.S.B. Karbhat, ASI, Manchar Police Station, Pune Road.
____________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 28th APRIL 2026
P.C. :
. By this Application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in
Crime No.0007 of 2026 registered with Manchar Police Station, Pune, for
the offences punishable under Sections 64, 74, 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’ for short) and Sections 4,6,8 and 12 of the Protection
of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO’ for short).
2. It is prosecution’s case that on 2 nd January 2026 between 8.00 to
9.00 p.m. the Applicant took the First Informant in his car on the ground
that he will drop her to her requisite place and sexually assaulted her by
inserting finger in her private part by threatening her.
Page 1 of 4
20-BA-606-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
3. It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the
Applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as the Applicant has lodged
complaint against the Police Authority of that area, and to take revenge of it
the false case is filed against the Applicant. The learned counsel further
submitted that there is no reason for the First Informant to sit in the
Applicant’s car and it was not possible for the Applicant to undress the First
Informant while driving the car and inserting finger in her private part. The
Applicant is social worker, and requested to allow the Application.
4. It is contention of learned APP along with learned counsel for
Respondent No.2 that the Applicant took the victim in his car stating that
he will drop her at the place where her friend was filling petrol in
motorcycle but he sexually assaulted her by inserting finger in her private
part. She was 17 years and five months old. If the Applicant released on
bail, he may abscond or threaten First Informant and prosecution witnesses,
and requested to reject the Application.
5. I have heard all learned counsel. Perused charge-sheet.
6. In the FIR, it is mentioned that the Applicant took the First
Informant in his car and by threatening her, undressed her and inserted
finger in her private part. At the time of the incident, the victim was more
than 17 years and five months old whereas the Applicant was 45 years old.
Page 2 of 4
20-BA-606-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
The victim states that the Applicant locked the door of car but it appears
that the Applicant did not have any weapon to threaten the victim, and the
learned counsel for the Applicant produced the Application given to higher
authority of the police, making complaints against the Police in Manchar
area. Whether this complaint is relevant to the alleged offence is part of the
trial. Investigation is completed, charge-sheet is filed, victim was unknown
to the Applicant.
7. In view of above, I pass following order.
ORDER
(i) The Applicant be released on bail Crime No.0007 of
2026 registered with Manchar Police Station, Pune, on
furnishing PR bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or two solvent
sureties in the like amount.
(ii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence
and/or influence the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The Trial Court shall decide the case on its own
merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the
observations made in this order.
(iv) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police
Station as and when required.
Page 3 of 4
20-BA-606-2026 (CR).doc
N.S.Kamble
(v) Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 4 of 4
Checking your session…