IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1887 OF 2026 Sandip Sukalal Pawara VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Another Mr. A. S. Savale, Advocate for applicant Mr. S. B. Narwade, APP for respondent-State Mr. J. S. Jain, Advocate for respondent No. 2 CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J. DATE : 15th SEPTEMBER, 2026 PER COURT :- 1. Applicant seeks regular bail in connection with Crime No. 237 of 2022 registered with Dhadgaon Police Station, Dist. Nandurbar for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(N), 366(A), 372, 373, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 5(L), 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and under Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act. 2. First Informant is the father of the victim girl. According to him, present applicant and his wife went to their home and asked the victim to accompany them. There is allegation that they took victim to the place at the distance of 500 KMs where forcibly her marriage was performed to co-accused Govind. There is allegation that present applicant has received a sum of Rs. 3,60,000/- for arranging said 22-BA-1887-2026.odt 1 of 4 2026:BHC-AUG:42309 marriage of victim i.e., said to be minor girl and was subjected to sexual relations with co-accused Govind. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that co-accused Govind against whom there is allegation of committing rape on the victim has been enlarged on regular bail by the trial Court, it is his submission that having regard to the said fact the present bail application cannot be rejected. He further submits that there is evidence in the form of Adhar Card collected during the course of investigation indicating that victim was major at the relevant time and considering the delay caused in lodging of the report, possibility of performing marriage on her free will is not ruled out. According to him there is no evidence to the effect that applicant received any money as alleged. 4. Learned APP and learned Counsel for informant who was appointed by this Court submits that in view of the fact that the informant in spite of service of notice has failed to cause appearance before the Court to oppose grant of any relief to the applicant. According to them, allegation against the applicant is that he forcibly made the victim to marry with co-accused on receipt of Rs. 3,60,000/-. Having regard to the seriousness of the crime, application deserves to be rejected. 22-BA-1887-2026.odt 2 of 4 5. Prima facie perusal of the record indicates that there is inordinate delay in lodging First Information Report. The accused against whom there is allegation about committing rape on the victim is already enlarged on bail. As far as allegation against present applicant of receiving Rs. 3,60,000/- is concerned and except for the statement of victim and other witnesses who do not claim that such transaction having taken place in their presence, there is no other evidence to support this allegation. The applicant cannot be kept in jail by way of pre trial sentence. He is not likely to flee from justice. This Court finds no justification not to allow the application. Hence, application stands allowed. ORDER (i) Application is allowed. (ii) Applicant be released on bail in connection with Crime No. 237 of 2022 registered with Dhadgaon Police Station, Dist. Nandurbar for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(N), 366(A), 372, 373, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 5(L), 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and under Sections 3(1)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, he shall be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one solvent surety in the like amount. (iii) He shall attend all dates of hearing of trial unless exempted from appearance. (iv) He shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly. 22-BA-1887-2026.odt 3 of 4 (v) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner whatsoever. (vi) He is further directed to cooperate the investigating agency for further investigation. 6. Fees of appointed counsel is quantified at Rs. 10,000/-. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) B. S. Joshi 22-BA-1887-2026.odt 4 of 4