Jaysing Alias Jaya Hanya Valvi vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2026 Latest Caselaw 1515 Bom

Bombay High Court

Jaysing Alias Jaya Hanya Valvi vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 10 February, 2026

2026:BHC-AUG:5757



                                                                   950 BA No.2347.2025
                                              -1-

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                           BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2347 OF 2025

                              JAYSING ALIAS JAYA HANYA VALVI
                                          VERSUS
                         THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
                                              ***
              Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Amit S. Savale
              APP for Respondents-State : Mr. C. V. Bhadane
              Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Smita R. Kasture (Appointed)
                                              ***
                              CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
                                 Date : 10th February, 2026

              PER COURT :-

              1.         The applicant has approached this Court seeking

              regular bail in connection with FIR dated 09.07.2025 bearing Crime

              No. 116 of 2025 registered with Dhadgaon Police Station, Dist.

              Nandurbar for the offences punishable under Sections 64(1), 64(2)

              (f), 351(3), 331(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.



              2.         The prosecution case is that the informant is a widow

              residing with her two children. The accused is her maternal cousin-

              uncle. The case involves allegations of threatening behavior and

              other harmful actions by the accused against the informant.



              3.         According    to   the      prosecution,    on    06.07.2025

              approximately at 11:00 p.m., while the informant and her children
                                                     950 BA No.2347.2025
                                  -2-

were asleep, the accused gained entry into her residence by

opening the door. Accused forcibly caught victim's hand and

renewed demands for sexual favors. When the Informant refused,

the accused took a bottle of pesticide and poured it into the millets

stored in the house. Accused issued a life-threatening ultimatum,

stating that if she did not submit to physical relations, he would kill

her children. A neighbor who came to assist was also allegedly

threatened by the accused. The informant feeling coerced due to

the threats against her children. The accused is alleged to have

committed an act against her will and threatened against disclosing

the incident.



4.          Following the incident, the informant informed her aunt

and then parents. Upon being confronted, the accused reportedly

gave evasive answers and extended further threats. Accordingly,

the FIR came to be lodged 09.07.2025.



5.          The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the

applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the offence.

There is unexplained delay in lodging the FIR. While the alleged

incident occurred on 06.07.2025, the FIR was registered on

09.07.2025. This three-day hiatus indicats a period of deliberation

and tutoring rather than a spontaneous reporting of a crime. The
                                                    950 BA No.2347.2025
                                 -3-

investigation is complete and the charge-sheet is filed. Nothing

remains to be recovered at the instance of accused. Hence, prayed

to allow the application.



6.          The learned APP and the learned counsel for respondent

No. 2 have vehemently opposed the application, submitting that

the applicant has been involved in the act of sexually exploiting the

victim. The offence is serious in nature. If the applicant is enlarged

on bail, there is every possibility of tampering with the prosecution

evidence. As such, it is prayed that the application be rejected.



7.          Upon considering the submissions of both sides and

perusing the material on record, including the charge sheet, the

alleged incident occurred on 06.07.2025 approximately at 23:00

hours. However, the FIR was lodged on 09.07.2025. While the

prosecution attributes this delay to fear and threats, the gap of

nearly three days prima facie indicates the possibility of an

afterthought. The same is a factor that must be tested during the

trial.



8.          The prosecution alleges that the accused forcibly

disrobed the informant and committed sexual intercourse after a

physical struggle. However, the medical examination report of the
                                                         950 BA No.2347.2025
                                     -4-

informant, prima facie, reveals no external injuries, abrasions, or

marks of violence on her person. In a case involving allegations of

forcible intercourse, the total absence of any signs of resistance,

weakens the prosecution's claim of physical coercion at this prima

facie stage.



9.             Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of

the case, the applicant deserves to be entitled for bail. The

apprehension expressed by the learned APP and the learned

counsel for respondent No.2 about tampering with the prosecution

evidence can be adequately taken care of by imposing stringent

conditions.



10.            The   investigation   is    complete   for   all   intent   and

purposes. Resultantly, the charge-sheet is filed. Having regard to

the number of the witnesses which the prosecution proposes to

examine, it is very unlikely that the trial can be commenced and

concluded within a reasonable period.



11.            As such, further detention of the applicant as an under

trial prisoner, in the circumstances of the case does not seem to be

either warranted or justifiable. I am, therefore, persuaded to

exercise the discretion in favor of the applicant.
                                                          950 BA No.2347.2025
                                     -5-


12.            The    High   Court    Legal   Services     Sub-Committee,

Aurangabad, to pay the fees to the learned counsel appointed on

behalf of respondent No. 2, as per rules.



13.            Resultantly, following order is passed :-

                                  ORDER

       (I)       Application is allowed.

       (II)      Applicant - Jaysing @ Jaya Hanya Valvi be released on

regular bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Fifty Thousand Only) with one or two local solvent sureties in the like amount, in connection with Crime No. 116 of 2025 registered with Dhadgaon Police Station, Dist. Nandurbar for the offences punishable under Sections 64(1), 64(2)(f), 351(3), 331(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, on the following conditions :-

(a) The applicant shall not enter into the village Goramba Mawdabipada, Tq. Dhadgaon, Dist. Nandurbar, till conclusion of the trial.

(b) The applicant shall attend each and every date of the Trial Court, unless exempted by the Trial Court.

(c) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner.

(d) The applicant shall submit his Aadhar and Pan Card to

the Investigation Officer and detailed addresses and phone numbers of applicant and two of the near relatives.

(e) In case of breach of any of the conditions by the applicant, it is open for the Prosecution to move this Court seeking cancellation of bail.

(III) Needless to states that the observations rendered herein are to the extent of this application and the trial court shall not be influenced by the same.

(SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.)

Omkar Joshi