1 14. BA 1192 of 2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1192 OF 2026 PRAFUL S/O LAHANUJI DABHADE VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR PSO., PS ARVI, TAHSIL ARVI, DIST. WARDHA AND ANOTHER Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. K.J. Topale a/w Mr. R.C. Rathi, Advocate for Applicant. Ms. S.S. Dhote, APP for Non-Applicant No.1-State. Ms. M.S. Gulati, Advocate (Appointed) for Non-Applicant No.2. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATED : 07th OCTOBER 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Counsel appearing for non-applicant No.2 as well as learned APP for the State. 2. By this application, the applicant is seeking bail in connection with Crime No.444 of 2026, registered with Police Station Arvi, Dist. Wardha, for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 85, 115(2), 351(2), 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the first information report was registered by the informant/victim on 2026:BHC-NAG:13370 2 14. BA 1192 of 2026.odt 15.07.2026, stating that the applicant is her brother-in-law and other co-accused are her husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law. It is alleged that, on 15.12.2024 and 28.01.2025, the applicant committed sexual intercourse with the victim and in spite of disclosure made to other co-accused, they did not act upon it. Hence, the FIR. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the FIR was registered as an afterthought. It is alleged that the incident occurred on 15.12.2024 and 28.01.2025, whereas the FIR was registered on 15.07.2026 i.e. almost after delay of more than one year and six months. He submits that a non-cognizable report was registered by the victim against her husband on 12.06.2026. In that N.C. report, the victim has not disclosed that the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with her and that the said fact was disclosed by her to in-laws and the husband. He submits that the marriage of the victim with co-accused took place on 27.05.2024. At the relevant time, the victim and her husband along with the applicant and other co-accused were residing together, however, the husband of the victim and the victim started residing separately in the month of March 2026 at Nagpur. He submits that there is no substance in the allegations made by the victim and therefore, considering the inordinate delay in registering the FIR, the applicant deserves to be granted bail. 3 14. BA 1192 of 2026.odt 5. On the other hand, learned APP and learned Counsel appearing for the victim vehemently opposed the application and submitted that considering the nature of case and relations between the parties, the victim might not disclose the incident immediately and would want to save her marriage. Under such circumstances, there is nothing to disbelieve the version of the victim and therefore, prayed to reject the application. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions of both the sides, prima facie, it appears that the marriage between the victim and co-accused took place on 27.05.2024. It further appears that in the month of March 2026, the husband and the victim separated from other family members and started residing at Nagpur. It further appears that on 12.06.2026, there was quarrel between the victim and her husband and accordingly, a non-cognizable report was registered by her against her husband. The FIR was registered on 15.07.2026, alleging that on 15.12.2024 and 28.01.2025, the applicant committed sexual intercourse with her and in spite of disclosure made to other co-accused, they have not acted upon it. 7. It is to be noted that when the non-cognizable offence was registered on 12.06.2026, nothing was narrated by the victim about the alleged incident that took place in the year 2024-25. It is 4 14. BA 1192 of 2026.odt very difficult to accept the allegations when there is inordinate delay of one year and six months and also on perusal of FIR, it is unclear as to reason that what prompted the informant to register the FIR. It was expected that after 15.12.2024 and 28.01.2025, the victim should have approached the police immediately or after some time. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, a case is made out for grant of bail to the applicant. Hence, following order is passed. ORDER i) The Criminal Application is allowed and disposed of. ii) The applicant/accused viz. Praful S/o. Lahanuji Dabhade, be released on bail in connection with Crime No.444 of 2026, registered with Police Station Arvi, Dist. Wardha, for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(m), 85, 115(2), 351(2), 352 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on furnishing a P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) with two sureties in the like amount. iii) The accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the evidence. iv) The accused shall provide his residential address and cell number to concerned Police Station and shall not change his place of residence without prior intimation to the concerned Investigating Officer. 5 14. BA 1192 of 2026.odt v) The applicant/accused shall attend each and every date of trial regularly. If he fails to attend the trial on even a single date or fails to comply with the aforesaid conditions, his default would entail the State to ask for cancellation of bail. vi) Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. 8. The observations of this Court are prima facie in nature and are only limited to this application. The trial Court shall not be influenced by the aforesaid observations. 9. Fees of the appointed Counsel be quantified as per Rules by the High Court Legal Services Sub Committee, Nagpur. (M.M. NERLIKAR, J.) asd