39-ba-1769-26.doc IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.1769 OF 2026 Vishal Laxman Mhashal .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2887 OF 2026 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.1769 OF 2026 ....................  Mr. Samir A. Vaidya a/w Ms. Shruti P. Ghodake, Advocates for Applicant.  Mr. Amit A. Palkar, APP for Respondent No.1 - State.  Mr. Akshay Patil a/w Mr. Krushna Wankhede, Advocates (appointed) for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.  Mr. Sachin Chavan, PSI, Panchwati Police Station, Nashik present. ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 21, 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Vaidya, learned Advocate for Applicant, Mr. Palkar, learned APP for Respondent No.1 - State and Mr. Patil, learned appointed Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3. 2. By this Bail Application, Applicant is seeking enlargement on bail in Special (POCSO) Case No. 41 of 2025 in C.R. No.589 of 2025 registered with Panchavati Poilice Station Nashik for the offences punishable under Sections 64(2)(f) and 351(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 r/w Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Meera Jadhav 1 of 5 MEERA MAHESH JADHAV Digitally signed by MEERA MAHESH JADHAV Date: 2026.09.22 11:30:26 +0530 39-ba-1769-26.doc 3. At the outset, Mr. Patil informs the Court that pursuant to the directions contained in the order dated 10th September 2026, he has spoken to Respondent Nos.2 and 3 and taken appropriate instructions from them. The record of the case prima facie shows that the Applicant is 26 years of age and the prosecutrix Respondent No.3 is 17 and ½ years of age and that they were admittedly in a consensual love relationship. Exhibit - A onwards are the depictions and material pertaining to the chats, photographs as also other material which has been placed by the prosecution on record which substantiate the consensualness of the relation between them. The prosecutix’s Section 164 statement has already been recorded and it has been shown to me. She has infact in her evidence admitted that the Applicant was a close relative and known to her and used to regularly visit their house and she was involved in the relationship with him. 4. The material which is placed on record prima facie does not show any element of violence, abuse or force having been exercised by the Applicant on the prosecutrix. Neither it is the prosecutrix’s case which is espoused and argued by Mr. Patil that there was any element of such violence involved. Mr. Patil after taking instructions of the first informant would submit that the first informant arrayed as Respondent No.2 is appearing online. I have interacted with Respondent No.2 on video conferencing and she also agrees and accepts the aforesaid submissions which are conveyed to the Court through Mr. Patil. Meera Jadhav 2 of 5 39-ba-1769-26.doc 5. In that view of the above, the present application is allowed and the Applicant is granted bail on the following terms and conditions:- (i) Applicant - Vishal Laxman Mhashal is directed to be immediately released from prison in connection with Crime No. 589 of 2025; (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at Panchavati Police Station, Nashik once every month on the first Sunday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.; (iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically exempted and will not take any unnecessary adjournments, if he does so it will entitle the prosecution to apply for revocation of this order; (v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra without prior permission of the Trial Court; (vi) Applicant shall not influence with any of the witnesses Meera Jadhav 3 of 5 39-ba-1769-26.doc or tamper with the evidence in any manner; (vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed of his current address and mobile contact number and / or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time, as applicable; and (viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation of bail granted to the Applicant. 6. This Court appreciates the assistance rendered by Mr. Patil, learned Advocate appointed through the Legal Aid to espouse the cause of Respondent No.2 and Respondent No. 3 (prosecutrix). His fees be paid by the High Court Legal Aid Services Authority as per rules on production of a server copy of this order and other compliances in accordance with the decision of this Court in the case of Sanjyot Nitin Telharkar v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.1 and the Schedule under Regulation 18(1) of the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority Rules, 1998. 7. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are limited for the purpose of granting bail only and I have not made any observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made 1 Judgment dated 25.09.2024 passed in Misc. Civil Application No. 134 of 2024 Meera Jadhav 4 of 5 39-ba-1769-26.doc hereinabove in this order. 8. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms. 9. In view of the disposal of the bail application, interim application does not survive and accordingly stands disposed of. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] Meera Jadhav 5 of 5