Bombay High Court
MUKESH SHOUKILAL CHARMAKAR (SAKET)versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The bail application was denied.
Summary
The applicant, Mukesh Shoukilal Charmakar, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the POCSO Act, 2012, alleging forced sexual intercourse with a minor victim aged 15 years at the time. The prosecution presented a charge‑sheet indicating repeated penetrative assaults, threats to the victim and her family, a pregnancy that ended in spontaneous abortion, and medical evidence supporting the allegations. The applicant argued his young age, lack of prior record, delayed FIR, and the victim’s and mother’s stated no objection to bail. The State contended that the victim’s minority, the seriousness of the offences, and the threat element outweighed any procedural delays or the victim’s no‑objection. The Court, after a prima facie assessment, held that the victim’s age, the nature of the offences, and the possibility of pressure on the minor warranted denial of bail, irrespective of the investigation’s completion or the applicant’s clean record. Consequently, the bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted under Section 483 BNS to an accused of offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and POCSO Act where the victim is a minor and allegations include rape and threats.
- Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the absence of fresh injuries affect the bail decision.
- Whether the victim’s and mother’s no‑objection can be treated as determinative in a POCSO case.
- Whether completion of investigation, filing of charge‑sheet, and lack of prior criminal antecedents favor bail in such heinous offences.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 351(3), 353(3), 64(2)(m), 65(1)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 12, 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- minor victim
- sexual assault
- POCSO
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 483
- threats
- pregnancy
- no objection
- prima facie
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:37593
948ba650-26
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
948 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 650 OF 2026
Mukesh Shoukilal Charmakar (Saket)
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra And Another
...
Mr. Bachate Pralhad D., Advocate for the Applicant
Mr. S. A. Gaikwad, APP for the Respondent-State
CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
Dated : 18th August, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard the learned Advocate for the applicant and learned APP
for the State alongwith the learned Advocate appearing for the
complainant. I have also perused the entire charge-sheet annexed to
the present application with their assistance.
2. By this application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant, seeks regular bail in connection
with Crime No.376 of 2025 registered with Jalgaon Taluka Police
Station, District Jalgoan, for the offences punishable under Sections
64(2)(m), 65(1), 351(3) and 353(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 alongwith Sections 4, 6 and 12 of the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3. The prosecution alleges that the incident occurred during the
period from 01.05.2025 till 20.09.2025. The First Information Report
1 of 5
948ba650-26
(FIR) came to be registered on 19.12.2025 and the applicant came to
be arrested on 26.01.2026. The investigation is complete and charge
sheet has already been filed.
4. It is the case of the prosecution that the victim was acquainted
with the applicant who was working with her father. According to the
victim, the applicant came to her house when her parents were away
and subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse. She alleges that he
threatened to kill her and her family members, if she discloses the
incident to her parents or anybody else. She has further stated that the
applicant thereafter subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse on 3 or
4 occasions. The matter came to light when the victim suffered heavy
bleeding, omitting and fever and for medical treatment was taken to
the hospital. The medical record refers to the pregnancy followed by
spontaneous and natural abortion.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant subsist that
the applicant is also of a tender young age of 23 years old. The victim
was also approaching the age of majority and both the families were
working as labourers. The FIR was lodged almost after three months
after the last alleged incident which took place and the circumstances
indicate that there was a consensual relationship. It was further stated
that the victim and her mother had tendered no objection for grant of
bail to the present applicant before the special court. He further
submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, investigation is
complete, charge-sheet is filed, however, till date the trial has not
proceeded. The learned Advocate for the applicant, thus, prays for
releasing the applicant on regular bail by imposing stringent conditions.
2 of 5
948ba650-26
He also submits that though the applicant is permanent resident of
Madhya Pradesh, if the condition is imposed upon him, he will not
leave the jurisdiction of the State of Maharashtra.
6. Per contra the learned APP opposed the application and
submitted that the age of the victim, when the alleged first incident of
rape took place, was 15 years and 6 months and when the FIR was
registered, the victim was of 15 years and 11 months. The allegation
concerns repeated penetrative sexual assault accompanied by threats.
The victim’s pregnancy provides material assurance to the prosecution
regrading sexual activity. It was contended that considering the victim's
vulnerability and the applicant’s access to her family, there is genuine
possibility of the pressure being exerted upon her.
7. I have considered the submissions and the examined the
charge-sheet. At this stage, it is settled that this Court do not have to
meticulously test the investigating material but have to prima facie
satisfy itself, whether the case for grant of regular bail is made or not
and that can be done only on the basis of the material which are are
part of the charge-sheet. The record presently indicates that the victim
was below 16 years of age at the time when the alleged incident has
taken place. The victim's account attributes a specific role to the
present applicant and alleged repeated act of penetrative sexual
intercourse coupled with threats to the life of the victim as well as her
parents. The delay in lodging of the FIR, as pointed out by the learned
Advocate for the applicant, at this stage, cannot be taken into
consideration as an isolated incident. The victim has stated that she
did not disclose the alleged incident to her parents due to fear of the
3 of 5
948ba650-26
threats given to her and the life of the parents. Because of these
threats, there is every possibility that the offence could not have been
registered immediately after the first alleged incident took place. In
fact, it is a matter to be appreciated that the alleged act of the applicant
surfaced after the victim’s heavy bleeding and was taken to the
hospital. Whether this explanation is ultimately accepted, is a matter
of trial.
8. Secondly, even the medial papers record that there was a
positive pregnancy test and treatment following the spontaneous
abortion. They also refer to old healed hymnal tear and the absence of
fresh injuries. Having regard to the interval between the alleged
incident and the medical examination, absence of fresh injuries cannot,
by itself, displace the victim's version at this stage of bail. At the same
time, the absence of the report pertaining to the applicant’s connection
with the pregnancy, at this stage, is also not necessary. There is no
material which finds place in the charge-sheet that the alleged incident
is a result of a love affair between the victim and the present applicant.
9. No objection stated to have been given by the victim and her
mother cannot be treated as a determinative. An offence under the
POCSO Act is not a private or compoundable by such no objection. It
would also be inappropriate, without evidence, to conclude barely from
the copy of no objection that the victim has already been influenced.
Nevertheless, considering her age, her circumstances, the allegations of
earlier threats and the applicants acquaintance with her family, her
protection from any possible pressure remains a material consideration.
Completion of investigation or filing of charge-sheet and absence of
4 of 5
948ba650-26
any antecedents are not the factors which would be taken into
consideration while deciding the bail appreciation in such grievous and
heinous offences.
10. The Bail Application, therefore, stands rejected.
11. Needless to mention that the observations made herein above
are prima facie and only for the purpose of deciding the bail application
and should not be taken as the final observations.
(HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)
JPChavan
5 of 5
Checking your session…