1 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [B.A.] NO. 1097 OF 2026 Praful S/o Annaji Sonule -- 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. R.M. Daga, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. A.M. Kadukar, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant No.1/State. Ms. S.V. Bhandwalkar, Advocate (appointed) for the Non- applicant No.2. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 28, 2026. Heard. 2. The present application is filed seeking regular bail in Crime No.68/2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m)(f)(k), 65(2), 75(1)(iii), 115(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered with Police Station Mankapur, Nagpur city District Nagpur. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the informant, Roshni Prafull Sonule, lodged a complaint alleging that her husband, Prafull Annaji Sonule, and her father-in-law, Annaji Natthuji Sonule Piyush Mahajan 2026:BHC-NAG:12943 2 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt has subjected the informant’s 8-year-old minor daughter, who suffers from cerebral palsy, to severe sexual abuse between 05/01/2025 and December 2025. The allegations state that the accused husband repeatedly exposed himself and forced the minor child to touch and hold his genitalia, and placed his genitalia in her mouth under the guise of giving her a “lollipop”. When the informant raised objections, the accused husband allegedly assaulted her, subjected her to physical abuse, and justified his actions. Furthermore, when the informant reported the matter to her father-in-law, he dismissed the incident, held her hand, and threatened to make both the informant and her daughter disappear if the matter was disclosed to anyone. It is further alleged that the accused husband subjected the informant to prolonged confinement, physical abuse, and intimidation, and attempted to forcibly take the minor child away from her school. Based on these allegations, the First Information Report (F.I.R.) came to be registered on 25/02/2026. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the informant, who is the wife of the applicant, has lodged the First Information Report against the applicant, alleging that on 05/01/2025 at about 08:00 a.m., she had seen the applicant, who is the father of the victim, along with the victim in a Piyush Mahajan 3 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt compromised position. There are serious allegations made against the applicant of sexual assault on his own daughter, who is about 8 years of age. He further submits that the marriage between the applicant and the informant was solemnized 9 years ago and the victim is their daughter from the said wedlock. A dispute arose in the year 2018 between the applicant and the informant when a complaint was lodged with Police Station, Gittikhadan, by the parents of the applicant against the informant, alleging mental harassment. Since that date, the relationship between the informant and the applicant had become strained. The F.I.R., which was lodged by the wife of the applicant, alleges that on 05/01/2025, the applicant committed sexual assault on the minor; however, he submits that the F.I.R. was registered after one year and one month, i.e., on 25/02/2026. The wife-informant had filed an application with the Bharosa Cell against the applicant, alleging harassment by him. In the complaint which was filed by the informant before the Bharosa Cell, there is no whisper about the allegations made in the F.I.R. He further submits that nearly 10-12 dates were given before the Bharosa Cell between 05/09/2024 and 23/02/2026; however, according to the learned counsel, not on a single occasion, the informant stated, at any point of time, Piyush Mahajan 4 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt that the applicant had committed sexual assault on his own daughter. Accordingly, he submits that the entire allegations are made only to secure an advantage against the applicant, since she has failed before the Bharosa Cell. He invited the attention to the proceedings before the Bharosa Cell and submits that the proceedings dated 05/02/2026 and 23/02/2026 show the conduct of the informant. He further submits that even in the proceedings dated 23/02/2026, there is no whisper about the alleged incident of sexual assault on the victim by the applicant, and therefore, the learned counsel submits that the allegations are made with an ulterior motive and in order to bend the applicant. The informant has put forward the daughter so as to gain an advantage against the applicant. Under such circumstances, he submits that recently the Supreme Court, in the case of Ishwar Chand Sharma & Others -Vrs.- State of Uttar Pradesh & Another, 2026 INSC 587, in an identical set of facts, has quashed the complaint wherein somewhat identical allegations were made against the father therein. He further relies on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of ‘R’ -Vrs.- ‘E’ & Anr., Civil Appeal No. 13119 of 2026 (@ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 1092 of 2024) and invites the attention to several paragraphs of the said judgment, submitting that even in the said Piyush Mahajan 5 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt judgment, the Supreme Court has relied on the Ishwar Chand Sharma case (supra). Present case is a classic example where the informant-wife is taking undue advantage after having failed in the proceedings of cruelty and harassment and prays to grant bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel for the victim vehemently opposed the application and submitted that, under the circumstances in which the F.I.R. came to be registered, it cannot be said that the F.I.R. was registered at a belated stage, i.e., after one year and one month. They further submitted that there may be differences between the applicant and the informant; however, according to them, no mother would put her daughter’s character at risk. The victim is a person with an intellectual disability and is 8 years of age. Merely because the informant did not disclose the incident of sexual assault before the Bharosa Cell, that by itself is not sufficient to discard the allegations. However, they invited the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim, wherein the victim has supported the version of the informant and the contents of the F.I.R. Since the victim is just 8 years of age having intellectual disability, the applicant has taken undue advantage of the said fact and committed sexual assault on the victim. The Piyush Mahajan 6 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt applicant being the father of the victim, there is a possibility that the mother, who is the informant, did not disclose the incident before the Bharosa Cell due to fear or due to some other reason. The applicant had threatened them, which can be gathered from the F.I.R., stating that if the informant or the victim disclosed the fact of sexual assault to any other person, the applicant would not provide them with food or shelter and they would face dire consequences. The learned A.P.P. relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar -Vrs.- Rajballav Prasad Alias Rajballav Prasad Yadav, (2017) 2 SCC 178. Under such circumstances, they submitted that, considering the serious allegations against the applicant, the applicant does not deserve to be granted bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions. Upon careful perusal of F.I.R., charge-sheet and the material on record, it appears that the incident in question occurred on 05/01/2025, wherein the informant herself witnessed the incident of sexual assault upon the victim. Further, it appears that the applicant is the father of the victim. Admittedly, the incident was reported by the informant-mother on 25/02/2026, i.e., almost after one year and one month. Upon perusal of the F.I.R., prima facie, it appears that serious allegations have been made Piyush Mahajan 7 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt against the applicant; however, the same are to be tested on the touchstone of the material on record and the fact that initially, a dispute arose between the applicant and the informant in the year 2018, wherein the parents of the applicant had filed a complaint against the informant. Upon perusal of the said complaint, it appears that the allegations made therein are that the informant used to harass the parents of the applicant. Thereafter, it appears that on 05/09/2024, the informant approached the Mahila Cell / Bharosa Cell and lodged a complaint against the applicant alleging cruelty and harassment. The Bharosa Cell conducted several sittings between the husband and wife, i.e., the applicant and the informant. I have perused the minutes of those meetings. Though there were 10-12 sittings between the applicant and the informant before Bharosa Cell, there was absolutely no whisper about the alleged sexual assault by the applicant upon the victim. It is further to be noted that two important minutes of those proceedings can be referred to in order to consider the present bail application, i.e., those dated 05/02/2026 and 23/02/2026. This would be important for the reason that the F.I.R. against the present applicant was registered on 24/02/2026. Upon perusal of both sets of minutes of those proceedings, it could be gathered Piyush Mahajan 8 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt that the conduct of the informant could be seen from those proceedings, as she was blowing hot and cold while making the allegations. It is further to be noted that even in the proceedings dated 23/02/2026, there is absolutely no whisper in respect of the allegations which are levelled against the applicant in the F.I.R. which is lodged on the very next day. Therefore, under such circumstances the credibility of the information given by the informant itself is under shadow of doubt. 7. Under such circumstances, it would be useful to refer to the latest judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ishwar Chand Sharma & Others (supra), wherein, while considering somewhat identical allegations, the Supreme Court has considered several aspects, including the rising trend of vexatious litigation, specifically when there is a family dispute amongst the spouses. The Supreme Court in paragraph No.7.4 has observed as under: “7.4 At this juncture, we find it pertinent to mention that the prosecutrix had been living with the appellants for a considerable period of time and was fourteen years of age when the impugned complaint was filed alleging the aforesaid acts. Before the filing of the said complaint, there has not been even a whisper of any allegation of sexual misconduct against Piyush Mahajan 9 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt either appellant No.1 or 4 whereas it was only after multiple FIRs and complaints that were filed by the parties against each other, that the present Complaint No.05/2025 was filed before the Special Court. Therefore, after carefully considering and distilling the averments made in the complaint along with the surrounding attenuating circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that merely stating that appellant No.1 raped his daughter, is not sufficient to allow the impugned complaint to sustain especially when there is dearth of material facts and preliminary evidence on record to even form a prima facie opinion. ” Further, the Supreme Court in the same judgment has observed, under the caption “Rising Trend in Vexatious Litigation”, in paragraph Nos. 9, 9.2, 9.4, 9.7 and 10.1, as under:- “Rising Trend in Vexatious Litigation: 9. In the backdrop of the facts of the present case, we wish to underline a worrying trend that has come to our attention. Parties involved in matrimonial or commercial relationships with one another are resorting to filing of frivolous and vexatious claims and allegations of a criminal nature to settle personal scores and grudges against each other and therefore turn to nefarious/oblique means to attain the said objective. We also painfully take judicial cognizance of the fact that the courts of law are being misused and overburdened by such vague and vexatious litigations between spouses as many a times, the recourse to law and police is taken, in an oblique way so as to antagonise, pressurise, hound and harass the other spouse Piyush Mahajan 10 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt and their family members in order to retaliate and exact revenge that is carried out due to sheer hatred and disdain for the said spouse and their family members. ….. 9.2 We are conscious of the fact that there are many instances where women are gravely affected by matrimonial disputes and violence that they have to endure at the hands of the spouse and in-laws and other family members. Such cases deserve our utmost attention and judicial scrutiny so as to make sure that the ends of justice are met and the offenders do not go scot-free and rather get the punishment they deserve. However such a zeal to meet the ends of justice should be countenanced, by courts of law and executive authorities of the State, with a pragmatic approach bearing in mind the recent trend of criminal litigation in this country wherein the legal machinery and statutes are being used as a tool by mischievous litigants so as to create unnecessary hurdles and punish unsuspecting and often innocent citizens particularly in the sphere of matrimonial disputes. The litigating parties and their advocates should also be cognizant of the fact that such vexatious filing of false and frivolous claims and cases cast unnecessary burden on the already overburdened machinery and apparatus of the State and Judiciary. This factor also diverts the attention of courts and its resources whereas genuine cases of the parties with actual verifiable grievances are not being able to be adjudicated in time owing to the time spent in adjudicating upon phantom claims of mischievous litigators seeking to create litigation out of thin air or in the absence of a cause to do so. …… Piyush Mahajan 11 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt 9.4 In this regard, we would be remiss to not highlight the recent upswing in the false and frivolous matrimonial cases which have unfortunately brought to the fore the uglier side of litigation. A recent trend in this regard is when the wife resorts to filing false complaints and cases under POCSO Act alleging that the husband, who is also the father of the minor child, has committed wanton acts which are sexual in nature especially against the minor daughter. At the centre of this sort of litigation is a child who is often used by her mother against her father, against her will and wishes, so as to make false and vexatious complaints against her father and other male members of her paternal family in order to exact revenge or as an arm- twisting tactic to obtain a higher monetary settlement or to simply harass. …….. 9.7 Courts then owe a duty to subject the allegations levelled in the complaint to a thorough scrutiny to ascertain if a prima facie case is made out or not, and whether there is any kernel of truth in the allegations or whether the said allegations have been made only with the sole intent of spite so as to harass the opposite party with a prolonged process of criminal litigation, arrest and sometimes a conviction which later on may result in an acquittal by a higher Court or in a worse case, no relief at all being given to an innocent party. This stands more true when prosecution arises from a matrimonial dispute. ……. 10.1 Vexatious litigation in the realm of matrimonial disputes based on frivolous and false allegations should be discouraged by the courts Piyush Mahajan 12 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt and the members of the bar. Advocates ought to advise their clients against the initiation of frivolous criminal proceedings against their spouses rather than encouraging them to do so. In this aspect, we find it appropriate to quote the observations of this Court in Achin Gupta vs. State of Haryana, (2025) 3 SCC 756 wherein this Court observed that: “... the learned members of Bar have enormous social responsibility and obligation to ensure that the social fiber of family life is not ruined or demolished. They must ensure that exaggerated versions of small incidents should not be reflected in the criminal complaints. Majority of the complaints are filed either on their advice or with their concurrence. The learned members of the Bar who belong to a noble profession must maintain its noble traditions and should treat every complaint under section 498A as a basic human problem and must make serious endeavour to help the parties in arriving at an amicable resolution of that human problem. They must discharge their duties to the best of their abilities to ensure that social fiber, peace and tranquility of the society remains intact. The members of the Bar should also ensure that one complaint should not lead to multiple cases.” Further, the latest judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of ‘R’ -Vrs.- ‘E’ & Anr. (supra), while referring to the judgment in the case of Ishwar Chand Sharma, made certain observations Piyush Mahajan 13 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt touching upon the subject matter, which can be gathered from paragraph Nos. 45 and 76. “45) Thus, it is clearly mentioned in the aforesaid report that the POCSO Act is not meant for settling scores and any attempt made to misuse the provisions would accordingly need to be curbed. Although Section 22 of the POCSO Act is meant to deter false complaints, yet by the time this provision comes into application, irreparable harm may already have been done to the accused. This harm can take two forms. First, the accused may suffer prolonged incarceration, with the loss of liberty and the other adverse consequences that ordinarily accompany the registration of an FIR. Secondly, the accusation may adversely affect guardianship or custody proceedings being litigated in a different forum. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that certain precautions must be taken, within the four corners of the law, to prevent such harm from befalling the accused. ……. 76) We may now briefly consider a related situation. The child who is the alleged victim of an offence under the POCSO Act may be the subject of guardianship or custody proceedings between the child's parents, and the offence may be alleged against one of the parents or against any other family member of that parent living under the same roof as the child. In such a case, the registration of the POCSO case may adversely affect that parent's interests in the guardianship or custody proceedings. If the complaint is made with mala fide intent, its purpose may be to gain an upper hand in those proceedings. In such cases, the concerned court should adopt the approach suggested by the Kerala High Court in Suhara Piyush Mahajan 14 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt (supra), to which we have already referred. To reiterate, the Kerala High Court held that: (i) the mere registration of a case under the POCSO Act should not by itself give rise to an inference that the allegation is true, and should not be allowed to become a ruse for defeating that parent's legitimate claim to custody or guardianship; and (ii) the court concerned, after considering the relevant material, including the material collected by the investigating agency, shall, on a case-to-case basis, form a prima facie view as to whether the allegations are baseless.” 8. Keeping in mind the above observations, the present matter requires consideration, when the proceedings before the Bharosa Cell were going on, the informant did not disclose the alleged incident of sexual assault by the applicant upon the victim. Therefore, prima facie, upon perusal of the entire charge-sheet, I find that the informant appears to be trying to bend the applicant by hook or by crook. It is further to be noted that, in the F.I.R. date of incident is mentioned as 05/01/2025, and thereafter, till December repeated act of sexual misconduct. Whereas the F.I.R. is registered on 24/02/2026. Therefore, considering the gap between first date of incident and the date of registration of F.I.R. which is more than 1 year, how a mother can keep quiet for such a long time when the sexual misconduct is going on in front of mother, and therefore, even this Piyush Mahajan 15 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt circumstance also creates doubt about the veracity of the allegations made in the F.I.R. 9. It is further to be noted that, as observed by the Supreme Court in the case of ‘R’ -Vrs.- ‘E’ & Anr. (supra), “the P.O.C.S.O. Act is not meant for settling scores and any attempt made to misuse the provisions would accordingly need to be curbed.” The Supreme Court has also referred to Section 22 of the P.O.C.S.O. Act in order to observe that, till the stage of Section 22 comes into play, substantial damage may be caused to the aggrieved persons, who may suffer prolonged incarceration. Since the story of prosecution does not inspire confidence and it creates doubt about the veracity of the allegations made by the informant against the applicant, and further, prima facie, it appears that the victim has been used by the informant in order to implicate the applicant. 10. So far as the judgment relied upon by the learned A.P.P. in the case of State of Bihar (supra) is concerned, wherein the Supreme Court has held that, as the accused had extended threats to the prosecutrix as well as her family members and material witnesses, including the father and sister of the prosecutrix, who were yet to be examined, the High Court should not have granted bail to the respondent, ignoring all the material and substantial Piyush Mahajan 16 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt aspects which were relevant considerations. Paragraph Nos. 22, 24 and 26 read thus: “22. The High Court also Ignored another vital aspect, namely, while rejecting the bail application of the co-accused, the High Court had ordered expeditious, nay, day-to-day trial to ensure that the trial comes to an end most expeditiously. When order had already been passed to fast track the trial, and the application for bail by the co-accused Sandeep Suman alias Pushpanjay was also rejected, the High Court, while considering the bail application of the respondent, was supposed to take into consideration this material fact as well. Further, while making a general statement of law that the accused is innocent, till proved guilty, the provisions of Section 29 of the Pocso Act have not been taken into consideration, which reads follows: "29. Presumption as to certain offences. Where a person is prosecuted for committing or abetting or attempting to commit any offence under Sections 3, 5, 7 and Section 9 of this Act, the Special Court shall presume, that such person has committed or abetted or attempted to commit the offence, as the case may be unless the contrary is proved.” 24. As indicated by us in the beginning, prime consideration before us is to protect the fair trial and ensure that justice is done. This may happen only if the witnesses are able to depose without fear, freely and truthfully and this Court is convinced that in the present case, that can be ensured only if the respondent is not enlarged on bail. This importance of fair trial was emphasised Piyush Mahajan 17 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt in Panchanan Mishra v. Digambar Mishra while setting aside the order of the High Court granting bail in the following terms: (SCC pp. 147-48, para 13) "13. We have given our careful consideration to the rival submissions made by the counsel appearing on either side. The object underlying the cancellation of bail is to protect the fair trial and secure justice being done to the society by preventing the accused who is set at liberty by the bail order from tampering with the evidence in the heinous crime and if there is delay in such a case the underlying object of cancellation of bail practically loses all its purpose and significance to the greatest prejudice and the interest of of the same indulge in various activities like tampering with the prosecution witnesses, threatening the family members of the deceased victim and also create problems of law and order situation.” 26. We are conscious of the fact that the respondent is only an undertrial and his liberty is also a relevant consideration. However, equally important consideration is the interest of the society and fair trial of the case. Thus, undoubtedly the courts have to adopt a liberal approach while considering bail applications of the accused persons. However, in a given case, if it is found that there is a possibility of Interdicting fair trial by the accused if released on bail, this public interest of fair trial would outweigh the personal interest of the accused while undertaking the task of balancing the liberty of the accused on the one hand and interest of the society to have a fair trial on the other band. When the witnesses are not able to Piyush Mahajan 18 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt depose correctly in the court of law, it results in low rate of conviction and many times even hardened criminals escape the conviction. It shakes public confidence in the criminal justice- delivery system. It is this need for larger public interest to ensure that criminal justice-delivery system works efficiently, smoothly and in a fair manner that has to be given prime importance in such situations. After all, if there is a threat to fair trial because of intimidation of witnesses, etc., that would happen because of wrongdoing of the accused himself, and the consequences thereof, he has to suffer. This is so beautifully captured by this Court in Masroor v. State of U.P.14 in the following words: (SCC p. 290, para 15) "15. There is no denying the fact that the liberty of an individual is precious and is to be zealously protected by the courts. Nonetheless, such a protection cannot be absolute in every situation. The valuable right of liberty of an individual and the interest of the society in general has to be balanced. Liberty of a person accused of an offence would depend upon the exigencies of the case. It is possible that in a given situation, the collective interest of the community may outweigh the right of personal liberty of the individual concerned. In this context, the following observations of this Court in Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiaq Hasan Khan's are quite apposite (SCC p. 691, para 6) 6. Liberty is to be secured through process of law, which is administered keeping in mind the interests of the accused, the near and dear of the Piyush Mahajan 19 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt victim who lost his life and who feel helpless and believe that there is no justice in the world as also the collective interest of the community so that parties do not lose faith in the institution and indulge in private retribution." 11. Perusal of the above-referred paragraphs would demonstrate that the facts in the case of State of Bihar (supra) are totally different, and therefore, it would not be applicable in the present given set of facts. 12. So far as the statement of victim is concerned, though it supports the version of the informant, however, it is unsafe to rely considering the above discussion. Therefore, considering the above discussion, further the observations of the Supreme Court in the case of Ishwar Chand Sharma (supra) and ‘R’ -Vrs.- ‘E’ & Anr., (supra), I am inclined to grant bail by imposing stringent conditions. Hence, the following order: O R D E R (i) The Criminal Application is allowed; (ii) The applicant/accused (Praful S/o Annaji Sonule) be released on regular bail in connection with Crime No.68/2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m)(f) Piyush Mahajan 20 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt (k), 65(2), 75(1)(iii), 115(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered with Police Station Mankapur, District Nagpur, on his furnishing a P.R. bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two solvent sureties in the like amount; (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, and also shall not tamper with the evidence; (iv) The applicant shall provide his residential address and cell number to the Police Station concerned and shall not change his place of residence without prior intimation to the Investigating Agency; (v) Once the trial commences, the accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial for one single date, or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail; (vi) Fees of the appointed counsel be quantified and paid as per rules; Piyush Mahajan 21 29-Cr.BA-1097-2026.odt (vii) The observations of this Court are prima facie in nature. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by the same; (viii) Pending Misc. 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: 30/09/2026 15:08:07