Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3765 (BOM)

AKASH ALIAS GOKUL SURESH BODKE v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR

APL/1487/2026 · 2026-08-21

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 apl 1487 of 2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1487 OF 2026 Akash alias Gokul Suresh Bodke .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. Respondents ....................  Mr. Ajinkya Vilas Taskar a/w. Mr. Gaurav Ugale, Advocate for Applicant.  Ms. Anuja Gotad, APP for the Respondent No.1–State.  Mr. Vaibhav Balasaheb Deokar, Advocate for Respondent No.3.  Mr. Jitendra Patil, API, Sinnar Police Station, Nashik, present. ................… CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : AUGUST 21, 2026 P. C. : 1. Heard Mr. Taskar, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Ms. Phad, APP for the Respondent No.1–State and Mr. Deokar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.3. 2. I have perused the Aadhaar Card of the prosecutrix, who is arraigned as Respondent No. 3. She is a major, having completed 18 years and 25 days as on today. Last week, she got married to the Applicant. The Applicant was granted Anticipatory Bail by the learned Sessions Court, vide order passed on 11th August, 2026. The Applicant Rajeshri Aher 1 of 3 RAJESHRI PRAKASH AHER Digitally signed by RAJESHRI PRAKASH AHER Date: 2026.08.25 20:09:49 +0530 1 apl 1487 of 2026.odt and the prosecutrix are both before me. I have interacted with them in the open Court with the able assistance of the learned Prosecutor appearing for Respondent No. 1–State. The marriage certificate and all other proofs of marriage are appended to the Petition. Nothing further survives in the Petition. The Informant is the father of Respondent No. 3. He is a party; however, considering the age of the prosecutrix and since she is a major, the complaint of kidnapping would no longer survive. The Application, therefore, deserves to be allowed, as there is no impediment in allowing the same and no purpose whatsoever would be served in continuing with the prosecution for the present offence. The Application is therefore allowed. 3. The learned Advocate for the Applicant informs the Court that two vehicles bearing registration Nos. MH-15-JW-6903 and MH-05-BS- 2447 are seized by the prosecution, which are presently kept in the custody of Sinnar Police Station, MIDC, Nashik. The Senior Inspector of the said Police Station is directed by this Court to release the vehicles to the Applicant, out of which one belongs to the Applicant and one belongs to a friend of the Applicant, namely, Aabaji Ramaji Karad, on the basis of a server copy of this order. 4. Considering that the criminal law was set in motion, I direct both the parties to pay costs of Rs. 5,000/-, each to the Kirtikar Law Rajeshri Aher 2 of 3 1 apl 1487 of 2026.odt Library, High Court, Appellate Side, Mumbai, within ap eriod of one week from today. 5. The Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b), which read as under: “(a) To allow present Criminal Application. (b) To quash and set aside impugned F.I.R. dated 21/06/2026 in connection with C. R. No. 218/2026 registered for the offences punishable under section 137(2) B.N.S. registered at M.I.D.C. Sinnar Police Station.” [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Rajeshri Aher 3 of 3