1 17-Cr.ABA-770-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [A.B.A.] NO. 770 OF 2026 Tulshidas @ Vishal S/o Pandurang Gulhane -- VERSUS -- State of Maharashtra and Another __________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. Mr. P.M. Khan, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. T.H. Udeshi, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant No.1/State. Ms. Aastha Sharma, Advocate (appointed) for the Non- applicant No.2. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 17, 2026. Heard. 2. Apprehending arrest, the applicant has approached this Court in connection with Crime No.427/2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 352, 69 and 89 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered with Police Station Karanja (Rural), District Washim. 3. The First Information Report came to be registered on 16/07/2026. The informant, a 20-year-old college student, came into contact with the applicant, Vishal Gulhane, via Facebook, thereafter a relationship between them started. On 24/02/2026, the accused allegedly took the informant to his Piyush Mahajan 2026:BHC-NAG:12448 2 17-Cr.ABA-770-2026 agricultural field in Umbarda Bazar under the pretext of introducing her to his mother, and thereafter he committed forcible sexual intercourse with the informant against her will, under the false promise of marriage. Subsequently, when the informant discovered that the accused had married another woman in June, 2026, thereafter the informant called him and informed him about her pregnancy. Whereas the accused pressured her to undergo an abortion, and provided her with medical pills on 01/07/2026. Due to severe health complications caused by the pills, the informant was admitted to the hospital, where her pregnancy was terminated on 05/07/2026. Based on these allegations, the First Information Report (F.I.R.) came to be registered. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and the victim belong to the same caste. He submits that so far as Section 69 of the BNS is concerned, two ingredients are important:- (i) A false promise of marriage and; (ii) Deceitful means. He submits that so far as the false promise of marriage is concerned, in the entire F.I.R., the first ingredient is not satisfied, even the applicant has not deceived the victim. Therefore, he submits that both the ingredients of Section 69 are absent in the present case. He further submits that it is the family of the victim who has declined the marriage with the Piyush Mahajan 3 17-Cr.ABA-770-2026 applicant since he is jobless. The F.I.R. itself discloses that the family members of the applicant are ready to perform the marriage with the victim. He submits that neither it could be said that the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with the victim under a false promise of marriage nor by using any deceitful means. He has relied on the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Kunal Rameshbhai Kalyani -Vrs.- The State of Gujrat & Anr. (Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.11526 of 2026). Under such circumstances, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel appearing for the victim vehemently oppose the application and submit that Section 69 has been carved out with a specific aim and object. They further submit that though there are two ingredients, i.e., firstly, sexual intercourse committed under a false promise of marriage, and secondly, by using deceitful means. Both the counsel submit that the applicant was ready to marry the victim since he has introduced her to his family and they were ready for the marriage of the victim and the applicant. They further submit that initially the applicant gained the trust of the victim and thereafter started a physical relationship with her. Thereafter, without informing the victim, the applicant married another girl, this fact itself is sufficient to establish that he has deceived the victim. They further submit that it was only after establishing a sexual relationship with the victim and after she became pregnant the applicant started Piyush Mahajan 4 17-Cr.ABA-770-2026 sidelining her. Therefore, both the counsel submit that this is nothing but a deceitful act by the applicant that fulfills second ingredients of Section 69. So far as the marriage by the applicant with another girl is concerned, it came to the knowledge of the victim on 22/06/2026 when she saw the WhatsApp display picture of the applicant. Thereafter, the victim tried to call him, and he told her that she should not talk to him and asked her to do abortion. Thereafter, he has provided pills for terminating her pregnancy. Therefore, both the counsels submit that the ingredients of Section 69 are fulfilled and the maximum punishment provided is of 10 years. The learned A.P.P. submits that custodial interrogation is necessary of the applicant to ascertain from where the abortion pills were procured and, further, for obtaining his DNA samples. Therefore, both the counsel submit that the application deserves to be rejected. 6. I have considered the submissions of both the sides. I have gone through the F.I.R. Section 69 of the BNS is a newly introduced provision carved out by the legislature to cover certain acts which do not amount to rape, however, where sexual intercourse is committed by deceitful means or by making a promise to marry a woman without any intention of fulfilling such promise. The notes on the said clauses specifically provide that: “Whoever, by deceitful means or by making a promise to marry to a woman without any intention of fulfilling the same, and has sexual intercourse with her, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, shall be Piyush Mahajan 5 17-Cr.ABA-770-2026 punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.” Keeping in mind the legislative intent behind the said provision, the present application is required to be considered. Upon perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that initially the applicant and the victim met through Facebook, and thereafter their friendship developed into a love relationship. It further appears that the applicant has also introduced the victim to his mother in the month of February, and accordingly, the applicant’s mother agreed for their marriage. It further appears from the F.I.R. that the applicant gained the trust of the victim and thereafter established a sexual relationship with the victim. Accordingly, on 24/02/2026, the applicant committed sexual intercourse with her. It further appears that the victim conceived and accordingly she was expecting that the applicant would marry her as both belong to the same caste. However, she noticed that, on 22/06/2026, the applicant had married another girl upon noticing, the applicant’s WhatsApp Display Picture. Thereafter, the victim has questioned the applicant about his marriage, however, the applicant told the victim to stop talking to him and asked her to terminate her pregnancy, and accordingly, pills were provided by the applicant. It appears from the F.I.R. that after taking the said pills, the pregnancy was not terminated. Therefore, the victim approached a doctor, and accordingly it was informed to the police and the F.I.R. came to be registered. It appears from the F.I.R. itself that the allegations are serious in nature. It is further to be noted that the applicant has not even Piyush Mahajan 6 17-Cr.ABA-770-2026 informed the victim that he is performing marriage with another girl. It is further to be noted that though the applicant was initially ready for marriage, since he gained the trust of the victim and committed sexual intercourse with her. Thereafter, he has declined to marry the victim and performed marriage with another girl when the victim was pregnant. Therefore, to curb these type of deceitful act on the part of the accused, Section 69 was introduced. So far as the observations of the Supreme Court in paragraph No.6 in the case of Kunal Rameshbhai Kalyani (supra) are concerned, those are not helpful to the present applicant since the facts of the present case and the facts of that case are totally different. Under such circumstances, in my opinion, both the ingredients of Section 69 are fulfilled. Considering that the offence is heinous in nature, and applicant deceived the victim, therefore, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, the Criminal Application is rejected. Fees of the appointed counsel be quantified and paid as per rules. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. [ (M.M. NERLIKAR, J.) Piyush Mahajan Signed by: Piyush Ramesh Mahajan Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 21/09/2026 14:49:39