Single Judge of the Bombay High Court allowed bail to the applicant in an offence under Sections 376(2)(n) IPC, noting that the acts between the accused and victim were consensual as evidenced by a notarized marriage, warranting bail.
Application allowed; applicant enlarged on bail on furnishing R. Bond of Rs. 30,000/- with sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BA 709-18.doc
Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 709 OF 2018
Ajay Ramnaresh Tripathi .Applicant
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra .Respondent
Ms M. A. Ingale, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr. Y. Y. Dabke, APP, for the Respondent – State
CORAM : SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J. DATE : 02.07.2018
P.C.
. Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and the learned APP for the Respondent – State.
1 of 4
BA 709-18.doc
alleging therein that the present Applicant hails from Uttar Pradesh. The husband of the first informant had brought the Applicant to their house and had introduced his wife to him saying that he happens to be his business partner and that he would be staying with the family for few days. It is alleged that the Applicant had disclosed to the first informant that he is in possession of her photographs and that he would circulate the same on social media. It is alleged that he had also disclosed that he had fitted CCTV camera in their bed room and has captured images of the first informant. The Applicant is alleged to have demanded an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- and Rs. 2,00,000/- on the ground that her photographs should not be circulated on social media. The first informant has further alleged that her husband had got married to one Renu Khan. The present Applicant had allegedly informed her that he would show her the house of Renu Khan and on the said pretext had taken her to Agra ( Uttar Pradesh ) and then he ravished her on more than two occasions under the threats of circulation of her photographs. She had parted with Rs. 15,80,000/- in his favour. It is also alleged that the Applicant had also threatened her elder sister residing at Agra. On the basis of the said report, the offence was registered against the Applicant.
2 of 4
BA 709-18.doc
supplementary statement of the Complainant and the statement of daughter of the Complainant, her husband was also arraigned as an accused. However, the investigating agency has dropped prosecution against him that he was granted pre-arrest bail.
3 of 4
BA 709-18.doc
that there was consensual sex between the Applicant and the first informant. The first informant was a married woman and mother of 13 years old daughter. In view of this, the Applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
O R D E R
in the sum of Rs. 30,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount;
(iii) Within four weeks from the date of his release, the Applicant shall furnish his address, cell phone number and other details to the investigating officer;
(iv) The Applicant shall also give an undertaking to the Sessions Court seized with S. C. No. 806 of 2017 and that he would attend all the scheduled dates before the Court;
(v) The Applicant shall furnish his permanent address, temporary address and other details to the Sessions Court also.
(SMT. SADHANA S. JADHAV, J.)
4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant deserves enlargement on bail given the circumstances of consensual sex and existence of a notarized marriage.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Ajay Ramnaresh Tripathi
The State of Maharashtra
Sadhana S. Jadhav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
