Allowed

Umang Haresh Boricha v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC24 Sept 2024ABA/2580/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted pre-arrest bail to the applicant in an FIR registered under Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The court observed that the parties were consenting adults and the investigation was nearly complete, imposing conditions regarding police cooperation and non-interference.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted subject to PR Bond of Rs. 25,000/-, attendance at Police Station on specified dates, and non-tampering with evidence.

Umang Haresh Boricha vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE SONAWANE Date: Chitra Sonawane. 2024.09.2715:35:44 12-aba-2580-2024.doc +0530

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2580 of 2024

¶4

Umang Haresh Boricha Age 22 years, Occ. Student, R/at. Shed No.2, Padamshi Mansion Building, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai – 400 012. ...Applicant Vs. 1. The State of Maharashtra (Through Kalachowki Police Station) 2. Ms. Jenal Rathod R. No.9, Padmavati Nivas, Mahavir Nagar, Kurla (W), Mumbai – 400 072. ...Respondents

¶5

Ms Tripti R. Shetty, for the Applicant. Mr Yogesh Y. Dabke, APP for the Respondent / State. Ms Ruchita Verma, Appointed Advocate for Complainant. Complainant-in-person present. PI Chabukswar, Kalachowki Police Station, Mumbai, is present.

¶6

Coram: R. N. Laddha, J. Date: 24 September 2024

¶7

P.C.

¶8

Miss Ruchita Verma has been appointed as an Advocate to espouse the cause of the complainant/respondent No.2. Legal fees shall be paid by the High Court Legal Service Committee. Applicant to furnish a copy of the application and other relevant papers to the Advocate so appointed.

¶9

Page 1 of 4

¶10

24 September 2024

¶11

Chitra Sonawane. 12-aba-2580-2024.doc

¶12

Heard Ms Tripti Shetty, the learned Counsel for the applicant, Mr Yogesh Dabke, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent No.1/State and Ms Ruchits Verma, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2/ complainant.

¶13

This is an application for pre-arrest bail filed by the applicant, apprehending arrest in CR No.245 of 2024, registered at Kalachowki Police Station, Mumbai, for offence punishable under Section 69 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶14

According to the FIR, the complainant and the applicant, initially met in October 2023, during which, they exchanged mobile numbers. Following this interaction, their relationship progressed into a romantic one. However, things took a dark turn when the applicant allegedly manipulated the complainant into intimate encounters under the false promise of marriage. After some time, the applicant reneged on his promise to marry her and began distancing himself, avoiding further contact. This series of actions ultimately led the complainant to lodge the FIR, accusing the applicant of deception and coercion.

¶15

Ms Tripti Shetty, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, submits that both the applicant and the victim are consenting adults who were engaged in a consensual relationship. Furthermore, the learned Counsel emphasises that the applicant has always been willing to marry the informant. The complainant was in constant touch with the

¶16

Page 2 of 4

¶17

24 September 2024

¶18

Chitra Sonawane. 12-aba-2580-2024.doc

¶19

applicant on WhatsApp even after their last alleged physical contact in July 2024. The investigation is complete, and nothing is to be recovered from the applicant. The applicant is ready and willing to comply with the conditions imposed by this Court, including undergoing a medical examination.

¶20

On the other hand, Mr Yogesh Dabke, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent No.1/State, contends that the offence is of a grave nature. The applicant is accused of engaging in sexual relations with the victim under the false pretense of marriage, which constitutes a serious breach of trust and exploitation. Despite the severity of the allegations, the learned APP, concedes that the investigation has been concluded except the medical examination of the applicant.

¶21

Upon reviewing the records, it is evident that both the applicant and the victim are of legal age and were involved in a consensual relationship. Their relationship lasted from December 2023 to July 2024. The informant’s main grievance is that the applicant abruptly stopped communicating with her, which has adversely impacted her mental well-being. The learned APP acknowledges that the applicant co-operated with the investigation and nothing is to be recovered or discovered from him. The applicant is willing to cooperate with the investigation which is nearing completion and is ready to undergo medical examination. To address concerns regarding potential

¶22

Page 3 of 4

¶23

24 September 2024

¶24

Chitra Sonawane. 12-aba-2580-2024.doc

¶25

tampering with evidence or witness influence, appropriate conditions can be imposed.

¶26

In light of the above, this Court is inclined to exercise its discretion to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant. Hence, the following order:

¶27

ORDER

¶28

(i) In the event of the applicant’s arrest in connection with CR No.245 of 2024, registered at Kalachowki Police Station, Mumbai, he shall be released on bail, upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶29

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on 30.09.2024, 01.10.2024, 03.10.2024 and 04.10.2024, between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.

¶30

(iii) The applicant, himself or through any other person, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses.

¶31

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶32

Page 4 of 4

¶33

24 September 2024

Umang Haresh Boricha v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umang Haresh Boricha v. the State of Maharashtra

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vasant Dhondiram Sutar Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Prakash Chimanlal Sheth vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Hiteshmkumar Pukhraji Jain vs State of Maharashtra

Mushtak Nisar Momin vs the State of Maharashtra

Ashit Balwant Doshi vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Maherunnisha Ahmad Qureshi and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra