[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Ankus Raju Gaikwad vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 10 February, 2026
2026:BHC-AUG:5758
959 BA No.2511.2025
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2511 OF 2025
ANKUS RAJU GAIKWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
***
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Santosh C. Bhosle
APP for Respondents-State : Ms. R. R. Tandale
Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Ms. Pratibha R. Jamdhade
(Appointed)
***
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
Date : 10th February, 2026
ORDER :
-
1 The applicant has approached this Court seeking
regular bail in connection with FIR dated 29.04.2025 bearing Crime
No. 77 of 2025 registered with Mudkhed Police Station, Dist.
Nanded for the offences punishable under Sections 65(1), 87,
137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 8
of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the instant FIR was
lodged by the mother of the victim, alleging that on 27.04.2025,
minor daughter, went missing from their residence. Consequently,
the FIR was registered under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita (BNS).
3. It is the further case of the prosecution that the
Investigating Officer conducted a search for the victim, who was
subsequently located on 18.05.2025 at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar
in the company of the accused. The victim's statement was
recorded by the Investigating Officer on 19.05.2025. Following a
medical examination and based on the victim's statement, Sections
65(1) and 87 of the BNS, along with Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO
Act, were added to the charges.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
victim was conscious of the consequences of being in a relationship
with the accused. There is an unexplained gap between the date
the victim went missing (27.04.2025) and when she was found
(18.05.2025). The learned counsel further submits that the POCSO
and additional BNS sections were only added on 19.05.2025
following a subsequent statement, which indicate an improvement.
Nothing remains to be recovered at the applicant's instance.
Hence, it is prayed that the application be allowed.
5. The learned APP and the learned counsel for respondent
No. 2 have vehemently opposed the application, submitting that
these accused have sexually exploited 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.
6. Considering the submissions of both sides and perusing
the material on record, including the charge sheet, it is a matter of
record that the victim was missing from 27.04.2025 until she was
located on 18.05.2025 at Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. The
significant duration of time (21 days) and the distance traveled
prima facie indicate a degree of movement that requires detailed
adjudication during the trial. Thus, prima facie, the factual matrix
those are emerging does not reflect any active inducement on the
part of the accused.
7. Apart from the aforesaid aspect, the investigation of the
case is complete for all intent and purpose and eventually the
charge-sheet is also filed. Nothing remains to be recovered at the
instance of applicant. Thus, no fruitful purpose would be served by
keeping the accused behind the bar.
8. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of
the case, the applicant's right to liberty needs to be upheld by
imposing stringent conditions. The apprehension expressed by
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. In that view of the matter,
the applicant deserves to be released on bail.
9. The High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, High
Court Bench at Aurangabad, to pay the fees to the learned counsel
appointed on behalf of respondent No. 2, as per rules.
10. Resultantly, following order is passed :-
ORDER
(I) Application is allowed.
(II) Applicant - Ankus Raju Gaikwad 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. 77 of 2025 registered with Mudkhed Police
Station, Dist. Nanded for the offences punishable
under Sections 65(1), 87, 137(2) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4 and 8 of
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,
2012, on the following conditions :-
(a) The applicant shall attend each and every date of the
Trial Court, unless exempted by the Trial Court.
(b) The applicant shall not enter into the vicinity of village
Navi Aabadi, Tq. Mudkhed, Dist. Nanded, till
conclusion of the trial.
(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 the
concerned Trial 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
