Ganesh Baban Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
Bombay High Court bail order dated 01.04.2025 (Milind N. Jadhav, J.); applicant is father of 7-year-old prosecutrix; FIR lodged by the mother (First Informant); applicant alleges false FIR due to disputes; medical examination inconclusive as refused by victim and informant; direction to prosecution to produce Magistrate-recorded '164 statement' if any, with spare copies for defence and Legal Aid counsel; bail application adjourned to 08.04.2025 under caption 'For Directions'; no merits decision on bail; Respondent No.2 represented through Legal Aid.
What did the court decide?
Interim direction: since the medical examination is inconclusive (refused by the prosecutrix and the First Informant), if any 164 statement has been recorded by the prosecution before the Magistrate, the learned Prosecutor is to place it before the Court, with two spare copies for the Applicant's advocate and the appointed advocate for Respondent No.2; the bail application is listed on 08.04.2025 for compliance under the caption 'For Directions'. No decision was made on the bail prayer itself.