1 947 aba 1596.25 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1596 OF 2025 Krushna Bhujang Kadam, Age : 21 Years, Occu. : Farmer, R/o Hathgaon, Tq. Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar. .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents Shri Vijay S. Wakale, Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs. R. P. Gour, A.P.P. for the Respondent No. 1. Ms. Sarika Maru Tekale, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 – appointed. CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 18TH AUGUST, 2026. ORDER : . Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Cr. No. 640/2025 registered with Shevgaon Police Station for the offences punishable U/Sec. 74, 115(2), 351(2) and 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 8 and 12 of the Protectino of Children from Sexual Offices Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the POCSO Act’) and, therefore, this application for anticipatory bail U/Sec. 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 3. The above-referred Crime is registered on the report lodged by the Prosecutrix. According to the Prosecutrix, on 20/07/2025, 2026:BHC-AUG:37004 2 947 aba 1596.25 when the Prosecutrix along with her brother were standing on the kaccha road near their residence, the Applicant came on a motorcycle and told the Prosecutrix that, he likes her very much and asked her to sit on the motorcycle, so that they can flee. The Applicant caught hold of her hand and pulled her Odhni. The brother of Prosecutrix intervened, and the scuffle took place between the Applicant and the brother of Prosecutrix. Due to the chaos, the family members of the Prosecutrix came out, and the Applicant fled. 4. The learned advocate for the Applicant made available the copies of the whatsapp chats to contend that, the Applicant and Prosecutrix know each other and having soft corner for each other. Since their friendship is not liked by the family members of the Prosecutrix, this false FIR is lodged. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 – victim opposes grant of any protection to the applicant by referring to the allegations made in the first information report. She also drew attention of this Court to the order passed by Special Court rejecting application for pre-arrest bail. According to the her applicant is habitual offender and sand mafia. She claims that even if the applicant is granted pre-arrest bail the same may likely to adversely affect informant – victim. 5. There is no dispute about the fact that after completion of investigation charge sheet has been filed. This Court while 3 947 aba 1596.25 granting interim relief has considered whatsapp chats between the applicant and victim – girl. It is rightly observed therein that there was more than a friendship between the applicant and the victim. In the light of this fact, this Court finds substance in the contention of applicant that said friendship was revealed to the family of the victim and there was reason to believe that first information report has been lodged at the instance of the family members. In any case the investigation has already been complete and as such this Court finds no justification in not confirming interim relief. The application therefore stands allowed in terms of interim order dated 16.09.2025. 6. The fees of appointed counsel to represent the respondent No. 2 is quantified at Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousands only) to be paid by High Court Legal Aid Sub Committee, Aurangabad. [ R. M. JOSHI, J. ] bsb/Aug. 26