Allowed

Rutik J Thorve v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Dec 2022BA/3350/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applications for bail in a case involving multiple accused charged with sexual assault, cybercrime, and inciting rape. The High Court granted bail to the applicant, distinguishing his case due to the absence of direct sexual assault allegations against him despite the complexity of the case.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed. Applicant released on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one or two sureties on same amount, subject to restriction on residence.

Rutik J Thorve Vs the State of Maharashtra and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

25-BA-3350-2022.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3350 OF 2022

¶4

… Rutik J. Thorve Applicant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and another … Respondents

¶7

Mr.Vishal V. Rankhambe for the Applicant. Mr. A.A. Palkar , APP for the State. Mrs.Sangeeta Patil a/w. Mr. Tajne for the Respondent No.2.

¶8

CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 22 DECEMBER 2022

¶9

P.C. :-

¶10

. This is an application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of bail.

¶11

The applicant came to be arrested in Crime No. 115 of 2022 registered at Karjat Police Station, Raigad for the offence punishable under Sections 376-D, 354-D of Indian Penal Code (IPC), Sections 4, 8, 13, 14 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 66 and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2008.

¶12

I have heard the learned Counsel for the applicant, the learned APP for the State and the learned Counsel for the respondent No2.

Dinesh S. Sherla

1 / 4

25-BA-3350-2022.odt

There are in all ten accused. According to the prosecutrix, in May 2021, the present applicant contacted her on her instagram account and thereafter they started chatting with each other. After few days, the present applicant told her to send her nude photographs and videos. According to the prosecutrix, she refused. However, she alleges that as the present applicant threatened her to show their chatting to her family members, she got frightened and was compelled to send her nude photographs and video to the present applicant. According to the prosecutrix, the present applicant then told her that he wants to meet her but when she refused to meet him, he threatened her that he would circulate her nude photographs and video to his friends. However, inspite of it when she refused to meet him, he stopped chatting with her.

¶17

According to the prosecutrix, after few days she got message from co-accused Chaitanya Thorve on her instagram account and he told her that he is having her nude photographs and video. He told her to meet him or else he would make her photographs and video viral. There are allegations of sexual assault, against the present co-accused as according to the prosecutrix, when she met this co-accused he touched her private parts.

¶18

According to the prosecutrix, after few days another coaccused Somesh Thorve contacted her, on her instagram account and told her that he is having her nude photographs and video. He too asked her to meet him. However, according to her, she did not meet him.

Dinesh S. Sherla

2 / 4

25-BA-3350-2022.odt

According to the prosecutrix, after few days another coaccused Jitendra Deshmukh contacted her on her instagram. He then made video call to her. According to the prosecutrix, this co-accused told her that he is having her nude photographs and video and told her during video call to remove her clothes or else he would make her nude photographs and video viral. According to the prosecutrix, she got frightened and removed her clothes. Against other co-accused also similar allegations are there and against some of the co-accused there are allegations of sexual assault.

¶23

As regards the present applicant, there are no allegations of sexual assault. Though according to the prosecutrix some of the accused subjected her to sexual assault, however, on her own she never disclosed about it to her parents. The report came to be lodged only when somebody told her uncle in some social gathering about her nude photographs and video. The applicant is in jail for about one year, I am therefore inclined to release the applicant on bail. Hence, the following order is passed :

¶24

(i) Application is allowed.

¶25

(ii) The applicant be released on bail in Crime No. 115 of 2022 registered at Karjat Police Station, Raigad for the offence punishable under Sections 376-D, 354-D of Indian Penal Code, Sections 4, 8, 13, 14 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 66 and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2008 on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

Dinesh S. Sherla

3 / 4

25-BA-3350-2022.odt

(iii) The applicant shall not stay at Village : Gaurkamat, Tal : Karjat, District : Raigad till the conclusion of trial and shall seek permission of the trial court if he is required to enter into the limits of the said village.

¶30

(iv) The applicant shall furnish his residential address where he is going to reside after his release to the Investigating Officer.

¶31

Dinesh S. Sherla

¶32

4 / 4

Rutik J Thorve v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rutik J Thorve v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Sohan Batunge Vs State of Maharashtra

Sudhir Dnyandeo Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rutik Ashok Dandanavare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Trupti Hukmichand Khandewal Vs State of Maharashtra

Ganesan Kaliyan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shankar Dattu Ahire Vs the State of Maharashtra