ABA/2500/2024 of RUTURAJ MOHANRAV JADHAV Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA on 12 October 2026

1. Heard, Mr. Abhijeet Desai, learned Advocate of the Applicant, Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned APP for the Respondent – State and Mr. Satyajeet Shirke, learned Advocate for the Respondent No. 2.

2. On 19.09.2024, the following order was passed :- Heard Mr. Kadam, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sonavane, learned APP for the respondent- State.

2. Considering the nature of allegations made by the first informant leading to registration of the FIR and in the light of WhatsApp chats allegedly exchanged between the applicant and the first informant, it would be appropriate that the first informant is made as party respondent in the present application. Arjun

3. Accordingly, leave is granted to the applicant to add the first informant as respondent No.2 by appropriately concealing her identity. The amendment shall be carried out forthwith.

4. Issue notice to the respondent No.2, returnable on 16.10.2024.

5. Respondent No.2 shall be served through the investigating officer and for that purpose, the applicant shall provide an additional set of papers to the investigating officer, within a week from today.

6. At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant is pressing for interim relief. He has relied upon the contents of alleged WhatsApp chats exchanged between the applicant and the first informant as also other material on record, to contend that it was a consensual relationship between the applicant and the first informant. It is further asserted that the present case can be said to be a case of promise of marriage that could not be fulfilled due to circumstances and not a case of false promise of marriage to physically exploit the victim. It is submitted that the applicant has always been ready to surrender his mobile phone and to co-operate with the investigation.

7. The learned APP has opposed the prayer for interim relief on the ground that the allegations are extremely serious, including the allegation that the applicant was threatening the first informant (victim) to circulate her objectionable photographs.

8. This Court is of the opinion that since the applicant is ready to surrender his mobile phone and it does not appear that till date, he has circulated any photographs of the informant, coupled with the impression gathered on the basis of contents of the alleged WhatsApp chats, a case for granting interim relief is made out. Prima facie, it does appear that the applicant and the informant were in a consensual relationship and although an attempt was made by the applicant to get married to the first informant, due to the opposition from his family members, the promise of marriage could not be fulfilled.

9. In the light of the above, there shall be interim order in the following terms:- A. Till the next date, in the event the Arjun applicant is arrested in connection with FIR No.0153 of 2024 dated 29.07.2024 registered with Panhala Police Station, District - Kolhapur, he shall be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount; B. The applicant shall remain present before the investigating officer between 10:00 a.m. and 12 noon on 23.09.2024 and thereafter as and when called; C. The applicant shall co-operate with the investigation, including presenting himself for medical examination, if required and he shall surrender his mobile phone to the investigating officer; D. The applicant shall not influence the informant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case and he shall not tamper with the evidence.

10. Needless to say, violation of any of the aforesaid conditions may result in this order being recalled.

11. List for further consideration on 16.10.2024, to be included in the supplementary list.

3. Mr. Abhijeet Desai, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that the Applicant appeared before the Investigation Officer at Panhala Police Station and cooperated with the investigation in Crime No. 153 of 2024. He submits that upon completion of the investigation, chargesheet was filed, which is registered as Sessions Case No. 237 of 2024 and is pending before the Sessions Court, Kolhapur. He submits that Sessions Case No. 237 of 2024 is at the stage of framing charge. He further states that the Applicant regularly appears before the Sessions Arjun

Court in Sessions Case No. 237 of 2024.

4. Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned APP for the Respondent – State, does not contest the statement made by Mr. Abhijeet Desai, learned Advocate for the Applicant, that Crime No. 153 of 2024 has now been registered as Sessions Case 237 of 2024 and is pending before the Sessions Court at Kolhapur.

5. Mr. Satyajeet Shirke, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2, states that Respondent No. 2 and the Applicant have amicably resolved the subject matter of Crime No. 153 of 2024 and are in the process of taking steps to seek the quashing of the FIR by consent.

6. Considering the statements made by Mr. Abhijeet Desai, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mr. S. H. Yadav, learned APP for the Respondent – State and Mr. Satyajeet Shirke, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2, further Applicant being on interim bail since 19.09.2024 and there being no allegations of the Applicant having breached any of the bail conditions of the order dated 19.09.2024, this Application is allowed by confirming the order dated 19.09.2024 and making the same absolute in terms of paragraph 9(A), (C), and (D) thereof. Arjun

7. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2500 of 2024 is disposed of. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) Arjun