949-APEAL-470-2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 470 OF 2026 Shubham Santosh Jawane VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others ... Mr. G. S. Shete, Advocate for Appellant Mr. M. A. Aher, APP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 Ms. A. P. Patil h/f Ms. Neha Udawant, Advocate for Respondent No. 3 ... CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J DATE : AUGUST 06, 2026 P. C. : 1. Appellant seeks bail in connection with C.R. No. 212/2026 registered with Police Station Chikalthana, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 351(4), 3(4), 5, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1) (w)(ii), 3(2), 3(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 2. The first information report lodged by the informant indicates that about friendship between informant and Appellant since 2020. Informant claims that Appellant had proposed her for marriage, which she refused. It is claimed that even thereafter the Appellant was assuring her of marriage. There is allegation in the FIR with regard to she being subjected to forcible sexual relations. There are other allegations in the report 2026:BHC-AUG:34133 949-APEAL-470-2026.odt indicating that after the engagement of the present Appellant with another girl, she confronted him about the same and upon it, he agreed to marry her. Finally, he performed marriage with another girl. 3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that FIR does not disclose any offence much less offence of rape. It is his submission that since first informant claims that relations between them forcible in nature, question of it being established by way of false promise of marriage does not arise. It is his submission that since Appellant has performed marriage with another girl, the possibility of false implication is not ruled out. 4. Learned APP and learned Counsel for Informant opposed grant of any relief to Appellant for the reason that there are specific allegations against Appellant in the FIR of he agreeing to marry with Informant and established physical relation with her and ultimately marrying to someone else. 5. Prima facie perusal of the FIR does not indicate even a single statement showing that on false promise of marriage Appellant has established physical relations with informant. The allegations of physical intercourse and false promise of marriage even otherwise cannot go together. This Court finds substance in the contention of learned Counsel for the Appellant that since the Appellant has married to another person, the possibility of present report being lodged against him is not ruled out. 949-APEAL-470-2026.odt 6. In view of above, Appeal deserves to be allowed. Hence, the order: O R D E R (i) Criminal Appeal is allowed. (ii) Appellant in connection with C.R. No. 212/2026 registered with Police Station Chikalthana, District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 351(4), 3(4), 5, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2), 3(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, shall be released on bail on furnishing PB of Rs. 15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one surety in the like amount. (iii) He shall attend the trial before Trial Court on each date of hearing. (iv) He shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly. (v) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner whatsoever. 7. Fees of appointed Counsel for Respondent No. 3 is quantified @ Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) to be paid by High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad. 8. The observations made herein above by this Court are prima facie in nature. Trial Court shall not get influced by the same. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) Malani