1 952BA1544.2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 952 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1544 OF 2026 Nitin Sunil Shelke VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Another ... Mr. Sunil B. Surse a/w Mr. Jitendra S. Jain - Advocate for Applicant Mr. K. K. Naik - APP for the State Mr. R. N. Bharawadkar – Advocate (appointed Through Legal Aid) for Respondent No. 2 through Video Conferencing ... CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. DATED : 23RD SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the Applicant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The learned Advocate for the Original Complainant/Victim has been appointed through the Legal Aid. Though his name appears on the screen, he is not visible nor audible. This matter was kept back for the purpose of enabling the learned Advocate appointed through the Legal Aid to represent the Victim, however, even on the second call, his name is only reflecting on the screen. 3. The present Application seeks regular bail in connection with C.R. No. 0061 of 2026, registered with Virgaon Police Station, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (Rural), for the offence punishable under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, and subsequently added 2 952BA1544.2026.odt Sections 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, and Sections 3(1) (w)(i) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, in the charge-sheet. The Applicant came to be arrested on 04.04.2026. 4. Before proceeding to decide the matter on merits, it would be appropriate to note that, on the date of commission of the offence, the Victim was 17 years, 10 months and 21 days old, while the Applicant was 23 years of age. 5. The case of the prosecution initially arose from the information provided by the parents of the Victim, who lodged a case of kidnapping against the present Applicant on the basis of certain photographs noticed by the mother in the mobile phone of the Victim. Subsequently, after the Victim was found, her statement came to be recorded, wherein she alleged that she was in a friendly and love relationship with the Applicant and that they were constantly chatting with each other on Instagram and Snapchat. From time to time, they used to roam around on his motorcycle and had also visited places such as Shirdi, including the Saibaba Temple at Shirdi. 6. It is alleged that, as the parents of the Victim were forcing 3 952BA1544.2026.odt her to get married, the present Applicant lured the Victim by stating that they would both run away from home and get married. Accordingly, on 03.03.2026, the Victim eloped with the present Applicant, and they went to the flat of the Applicant's friend at Hinjewadi, where they resided from 04.03.2026 to 04.04.2026. 7. It is alleged that, during their stay, the Applicant had sexual intercourse with the Victim on three occasions without her consent and by giving her a promise of marriage. When the Victim was brought by the Police to her residential house on 04.04.2026, she gave a statement alleging that the Applicant had forcibly subjected her to sexual intercourse. Consequently, the present offence came to be registered. 8. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that the age of the Victim on the date of the offence was 17 years, 10 months and 21 days. He submits that she was hardly a few days short of attaining majority. However, he submits that, taking into consideration the age of the Victim, it cannot be said that she was unaware of the consequences of her conduct. He further argues that this is a case where the present Applicant was 23 years of age and the Victim, who was about to attain the age of 18 years, were in love with each other and, therefore, they had, with consent, eloped from their respective residences and resided together, during which the alleged act has taken place. He submits that 4 952BA1544.2026.odt the present Applicant has been in Jail since 04.04.2026. There is no likelihood of the trial commencing in the near future and, therefore, the Applicant may be released on bail. 9. The learned APP appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposes the Application, stating that the theory of consent put forth by the learned Advocate for the Applicant cannot be made applicable to the present case, for the simple reason that the Victim was a minor on the date of commission of the offence. Whether the Victim was 17 years and 10 months old on the date of the offence is hardly of any significance, as the law requires that any Victim below the age of 18 years be treated as a minor. He submits that the Applicant was well aware that the Victim was a minor and that forcibly having sexual intercourse with a minor girl constitutes a serious offence. He further submits that the Applicant has a criminal antecedent of a similar nature, wherein another girl aged 17 years was also lured by the present Applicant on the pretext of a false promise to marry. In the said offence, the Applicant was released on bail and, during the subsistence of the said bail, he committed the present offence. Thus, the Applicant is a habitual offender and, therefore, ought not to be released on bail. He prays that the Application be dismissed. 10. After the matter was fully argued, learned Advocate 5 952BA1544.2026.odt Mr. R. N. Bharaswadkar appeared on the screen. He submitted that he has been engaged by the Legal Aid to represent the Respondent–Victim. His appearance is noted. 11. I have heard the learned Advocate for the Applicant and the learned APP, and have also perused the entire charge-sheet annexed to the present Application. Along with the statement of the Victim dated 04.04.2026, it is also important to note that the statement of the Victim was recorded before the learned Magistrate on 10.04.2026. Though the said statement reiterates what has been stated before the Police regarding the incident and the love affair and friendship with the present Applicant, the Victim has tried to improve her case before the learned Magistrate by stating that she was kept in a locked room and was also assaulted by the present Applicant. There are also allegations levelled against the friend of the present Applicant that the Victim was tortured and was made to perform all the domestic work. Without commenting upon the veracity or correctness of the statement, the only fact that requires consideration is that, on the basis of the said statement, there are certain discrepancies which the prosecution will have to prove by leading evidence before the learned Trial Court. The other circumstance that has tilted in favour of the present Applicant is the relationship between him and the Victim. It is admitted by the Victim that there was a love affair between the Victim and the present 6 952BA1544.2026.odt Applicant. The Applicant is 23 years of age, and the Victim was about to attain majority within a couple of months. Therefore, it cannot be said that she was unaware of the consequences that she might have suddenly realised upon completing the age of 18 years. Taking into consideration that the investigation is complete, the charge-sheet has been filed, and the period of custody undergone by the present Applicant since 04.04.2026, I am inclined to allow the present Application. Hence, I pass the following order: - O RDER (i) The Bail Application is allowed. (ii) The applicant shall be released on bail in connection with C.R. No. 0061 of 2026, registered with Virgaon Police Station, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (Rural) on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount, subject to the following conditions : a) The Applicants shall attend Virgaon Police Station every Monday between 12:00 hrs. and 14:00 hrs. until the framing of the charge. b) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, contact, threaten, induce or influence the informant or any prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. c) The applicant shall furnish his current residential address and mobile number to the Investigating Officer and the trial Court within seven days of release. 7 952BA1544.2026.odt d) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the trial Court and, if he possesses passport, shall deposit the same with the trial Court within seven days of his release. e) The applicant shall not involve himself in any offence of a similar nature while on bail. f) Breach of any of the above conditions shall entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail. g) The Applicant shall not enter the Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar District until the framing of the charge, except for the purpose of attending Virgaon Police Station, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, as directed, and for attending the Trial Court on the dates fixed for the trial. h) All observations in this order are prima facie and confined to the decision of this bail application. The trial Court shall decide the case independently on the evidence led before it. [iii] The Bail Application is disposed of in the above terms. [ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ] JUDGE SG Punde Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 29/09/2026 17:44:18