IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 915 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 526 OF 2026 AYAJ AJIM PATHAN VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER … WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2292 OF 2025 SHADAB RASID TAMBOLI VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER Mr. Sagar P. Mahale h/f Mr. Mazhar A. Jahagirdar Shaikh, Advocate for Applicant Ms. R. P. Gour, APP for the Respondent/State Ms. Sayli Tekale, Advocate for Respondent No.2 (appointed) in ABA No. 526/2026 Mr. A. A. Joshi, Advocate for Respondent No.2 in ABA No. 2292/2025 CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED : 30th SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Applicants seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 283/2024, registered with Ghargaon Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 123, 64(2), 351(2), 49, 74, 75, 78 r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Sections 8 & 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO). 2. The First Information Report indicates that the informant, a 19-year-old 915 ABA 526.2026.odt 1 of 6 2026:BHC-AUG:45361 girl, has made allegations against the Applicants. She states that in January 2020, she became acquainted with Applicant Shadab, and they were in a relationship. She further states that the said fact was known to her parents and, therefore, her mother and cousin brother advised Shadab in that regard, after which they stopped meeting each other. However, he continued to call and message her. 3. Thereafter, allegations have been made with regard to an incident in 2021, when the said Shadab took photographs with her and threatened to make the said photographs viral. She further alleges that in 2023, she refused to continue her relationship with Shadab. She claims that, despite disclosing her intention to him, the co-accused prevailed upon her and asked her not to break the relationship with him. She further alleges that she was abducted on 07.07.2024 and thereafter taken to Mumbai. She also claims that she was administered some substance and that, against her will, her marriage was performed with Shadab. 4. On the basis of these allegations, the Applicants apprehend arrest. 5. Learned Advocate for the Applicants submits that, insofar as Shadab is concerned, this is his first bail application before this Court. Though the application filed by Applicant Ayaj is his third bail application, there has been a change in circumstances, inasmuch as the statement of the victim recorded 915 ABA 526.2026.odt 2 of 6 by the Police when she was brought to the S.P. Office was not considered by this Court. 6. On merits, it is submitted that if the said statement recorded by the Police when the victim was brought to the S.P. Office is taken into consideration, there is no reason to believe the allegation made in the First Information Report that the Applicants abducted the victim and that she was forced to perform marriage with Applicant Shadab. It is submitted that, since the charge-sheet has now been filed, custodial interrogation of the Applicants is not necessary. 6. Learned APP and learned Advocates for the Informant opposed the grant of any relief to the Applicants. It is their contention that, insofar as Applicant Ayaj is concerned, this is his third bail application and, since his previous bail application was rejected after filing of the charge-sheet, there is no change in circumstances warranting entertainment of the fresh application. 7. As regards the merits of the case, it is submitted that the victim is 19 years of age and, considering her tender age, it is possible that she was unable to disclose the true facts at the first instance when she was brought to the S.P. Office. It is their contention that subsequently she gathered courage and disclosed the correct facts in the First Information Report, which, according to them, are sufficient to show the complicity of the Applicants in the crime in 915 ABA 526.2026.odt 3 of 6 question. It is their contention that, having regard to the nature and seriousness of the offence, this is not a case in which pre-arrest bail can be granted. 8. Perusal of the record indicates that the application of Ayaj was rejected by this Court after filing of the charge-sheet. However, there is nothing on record to indicate that the statements of the victim recorded in the missing complaint were produced before this Court for its consideration. If the said statements were not placed before this Court earlier and are now sought to be placed on record, the same amounts to a change in circumstances. This Court, therefore, finds no hesitation in entertaining the application of Applicant Ayaj. 9. The statements recorded during the inquiry into the missing complaint indicate that the victim admits her relationship with accused Shadab. The statements further show that the said relationship was without any force and that she had left the house on her own. Even with regard to the marriage, the statement indicates that she had, on her own, performed the marriage with accused Shadab. Apart from this, the statement of Dattu Thorat, uncle of the victim, also indicates that the victim told him that she had committed a mistake and that she wanted to go along with them. This statement supports the contention of the learned Advocate for the Applicants with regard to the possibility of the First Information Report having been lodged by the victim at 915 ABA 526.2026.odt 4 of 6 the instance of her family members. 10. In the light of these facts, and more particularly, the statement of the victim recorded by the Police at the first instance, and also in view of the fact that the charge-sheet has now been filed upon conclusion of the investigation, this Court finds no justification to reject the applications of the Applicants. Hence, the following order is passed. ORDER (i) Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2292 of 2025 is allowed in terms of interim order dated 24.12.2025. (ii) Anticipatory Bail Application No. 526 of 2026 is allowed in following terms: (a) In the event of arrest of Applicant -Ayaj Ajim Pathan in connection with crime no. 283/2024, registered with Ghargaon Police Atation, District Ahilyanagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 87, 123, 64(2), 351(2), 49, 74, 75, 78 r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and under Sections 8 & 12 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), he shall be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond of rs.15,000/- (rupees fifteen thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount. (b) He shall not contact the victim/witnesses directly or indirectly. (c) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner whatsoever. (d) He further directed to cooperate the investigating agency for further investigation, if any. 915 ABA 526.2026.odt 5 of 6 (iii) Both Applicants are directed to attend the trial on each date of hearing. 11. Learned APP for the Respondent/State to communicate this order to the concerned Police Station. 12. The fees of the appointed counsel is quantified at Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only). ( R. M. JOSHI, J.) ssp 915 ABA 526.2026.odt 6 of 6