1 5-Cr.ABA-759-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRIMINAL APPLICATION [A.B.A.] NO. 759 OF 2026 Ajay Sahebrao Charthal -- VERSUS -- The State of Maharashtra and Another __________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. Mr. V.G. Ingole, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. S.N. Thakur, A.P.P. for the Non-applicant/State. CORAM : M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : AUGUST 25, 2026. Heard. 2. Apprehending arrest, the applicant has approached this Court in connection with Crime No.448/2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 69 and 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, registered with Police Station Karanja (Rural), District Washim. 3. The informant is aged 27 years, and according to her, the accused, who was residing in the adjoining house, became acquainted with her in 2022 and subsequently developed a relationship with her. She alleged that, on several occasions between 2022 and May 2026, the accused established physical relations with her on the assurance that he would marry her. Piyush Mahajan 2026:BHC-NAG:11088 2 5-Cr.ABA-759-2026 She further alleged that on 25/05/2026, they went to Shegaon and stayed there, where the accused again had physical relations with her on the same assurance. However, on 11/06/2026, the accused allegedly informed her that he would not marry her as she is involved with another person. As the accused allegedly failed to marry her despite repeated assurances, the informant lodged the present report. 4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that, since 2022, the applicant and the victim were known to each other. The victim is a divorcee. They were in a consensual love relationship, and during which consensual sexual relations were established. Since the victim is a major, the offence under Section 69 is not made out. He further submits that the victim was having a relationship with another person, and therefore, the applicant refused to marry her. He has relied upon the order of this Court in the case of Ankit Hukumchand Malviya -Vrs.- State of Maharashtra, (2025) SCC OnLine Bom 734, and relied upon paragraph No. 8 of the said order. Under such circumstances, he submits that the applicant deserves to be granted bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. vehemently opposes the application and submits that, since inception, the applicant was not having any intention to marry the victim. The applicant has taken undue advantage of the loneliness of the Piyush Mahajan 3 5-Cr.ABA-759-2026 victim, as the victim was residing adjacent to the house of the applicant. She further submits that there are clear allegations that, under the false promise of marriage, the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with her. Under such circumstances, since the allegations are serious in nature, the applicant does not deserve to be granted anticipatory bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions. I have gone through the First Information Report. It appears from the F.I.R. that the applicant is 27 years of age. The victim is a divorced lady having one child. The applicant is known to the victim since 2022. Initially, they used to talk with each other, and thereafter, their relationship was converted into a love relationship. Thereafter, the applicant gave a promise of marriage to the victim and, on that basis, committed sexual intercourse with her on multiple occasions. It appears from the F.I.R. itself that he had given a promise of marriage on multiple occasions while committing sexual intercourse with the victim. The said relationship was broken on account of the allegations made by the applicant that the victim was having a relationship with another person, and the applicant refused to marry her. In my opinion, it appears that the applicant has committed sexual intercourse with the victim under a false promise of marriage as since inception, the applicant did not intend to marry the victim. Under such circumstances, no case is made out to grant anticipatory bail. So far as the order of this Court in the case of Ankit Hukumchand Malviya (supra) is concerned, the facts of Piyush Mahajan 4 5-Cr.ABA-759-2026 the said case are different from the present case. The fact also remains that the investigation is still in progress in the present case. Hence, the Criminal Application is rejected. Pending Misc. Application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. [ (M.M. NERLIKAR, J.) Piyush Mahajan Signed by: Piyush Ramesh Mahajan Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 25/08/2026 18:21:26