IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 927 ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1360 OF 2026 1. NAVNATH MAHADEO SANGALE 2. MAHADEO S/O MARUTI SANGALE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ... Mr. Rahul R. Karpe, Advocate for Applicants (through VC) Mr. S. P. Joshi, APP for the Respondent/State Ms. P. V. Giri, Advocate for the Informant CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED : 7th OCTOBER, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. After hearing the learned Advocates for the respective parties, when this Court expressed its disinclination to grant any relief to Applicant No.2- Mahadeo Maruti Sangale, learned Advocate for the Applicants, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw the application insofar as Applicant No.2 is concerned. 2. In view of the above, the application insofar as Applicant No.2 is concerned stands dismissed as withdrawn. 3. Applicant No.1 seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 216 of 2026 registered with Ashti Police Station, District Beed, for the offences punishable under Sections 74, 75, 118(1), 333, 115(2), 351(2) read with 927 ABA 1360.2026.odt 1 of 3 2026:BHC-AUG:47020 Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. 4. The First Information Report indicates that two incidents occurred on 15.05.2026 and 16.05.2026, in respect of which the offences came to be registered. As regards the incident dated 16.05.2026, it is alleged by the Informant that Applicant No.1 assaulted the mother of the Informant on her back. Except for the said allegation, no specific overt act is attributed to Applicant No.1. 5. Learned Advocate for Applicant No.1 submits that there were financial transactions between Applicant No.1 and the mother of the Informant and that the present report has been lodged with a view to falsely implicate Applicant No.1. It is submitted that there is no material on record to substantiate the allegation that Applicant No.1 assaulted the mother of the Informant. 6. Learned APP and learned Advocate for the Informant opposed the grant of any relief to Applicant No.1 by referring to the allegations made against him in the First Information Report. According to them, the said allegations receive corroboration from the injury certificate available on record. 7. Prima facie perusal of the record indicates that there is no material 927 ABA 1360.2026.odt 2 of 3 showing any injury to the mother of the Informant which can be specifically attributed to Applicant No.1. The material on record also indicates the existence of financial transactions between the parties. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the possibility of false implication of Applicant No.1 cannot be ruled out. Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the material available on record, this is a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail to Applicant No.1. 8. Hence, the application stands allowed in terms of the interim order dated 28.07.2026. 9. The fees of the appointed counsel is quantified at Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only). ( R. M. JOSHI, J.) ssp 927 ABA 1360.2026.odt 3 of 3