Salman Abdul Sattar Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Salman Abdul Sattar Shaikh vs State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted: Applicant to be enlarged on bail in connection with C.R. No.182 of 2024 (Deonar Police Station, Brihanmumbai City) on furnishing a PR Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, subject to conditions that he shall not tamper with or interfere with prosecution evidence, shall attend all dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless exempted, and shall not contact the First Informant/prosecutrix in any manner whatsoever.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Applicant, arrested in connection with CR No.182 of 2024 (Deonar Police Station) for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 323 and 504 IPC, should be enlarged on bail pending trial.

Court's answer

Prima facie perusal of the record indicates that this is a case of consensual physical relationship between two adults.

Ratio / Principle

There is record to indicate that the prosecutrix has in fact recorded no objection for grant of bail before the Sessions Court.

Key takeaways

In view of the above, this Court finds no justification in rejecting the bail application.ratio¶15
In any case, the Applicant cannot be kept behind bars by way of pre-trial sentence; he has no criminal history and is not likely to flee from justice.ratio¶15
The observations made in the judgment are prima facie and confined to this Application; the learned Trial Judge is to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by these observations.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (CR No.182 of 2024, Deonar Police Station, Brihanmumbai City); FIR alleging physical relations on a promise of marriage, Informant becoming pregnant and being driven away; charge-sheet filed; Applicant arrested 24th April, 2024. The High Court found prima facie a consensual physical relationship between two adults, noted that the prosecutrix had recorded a no objection for grant of bail before the Sessions Court (which the Sessions Court had declined to consider as it was in Marathi), that the Applicant had no criminal history and was not likely to flee from justice, and held that an accused cannot be kept behind bars by way of pre-trial sentence. Applicant enlarged on PR Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount, with conditions against tampering with prosecution evidence, non-contact with the First Informant/prosecutrix, and attendance at all Trial Court hearing dates unless exempted. All observations expressly prima facie and confined to the application; Trial Judge to decide uninfluenced thereby.

20_BA_2188_2025.DOC

Prasad

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.2188 OF 2025

Salman Abdul Sattar Shaikh …Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra …Respondent

Mr. Anees Aslam Shaikh a/w Anas Ehtesham Shaikh, Pallavi Waghade and Taha Qureshi, for the Applicant. Ms. Sangeeta D. Shinde , APP for the Respondent - State.

CORAM: R. M. JOSHI, J. DATED: 7^th APRIL, 2026.

PC:-

The Applicant seeks his enlargement on bail in connection with CR No.182 of 2024 registered with Deonar Police Station, Brihanmumbai City, for offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The Informant is a lady aged about 30 years. She claims to have got acquainted with the Applicant and they were in love relationship. According to her, the Applicant gave promise of marriage. On this pretext, the Applicant kept physical relations with her. When she became pregnant, the Applicant driven Informant away from house and refused to marry and hence report came to be lodged. On conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed. The Applicant was arrested on 24^th April, 2024.

Page 1 of 3 7^th April, 2026.

20_BA_2188_2025.DOC

Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that perusal of the FIR clearly indicates that there was consensual relationship between the Informant and the Applicant. It is his submission that in fact the prosecutrix had recorded no objection for grant of bail before the Sessions Court. However, as the said no objection was recorded in Marathi language, the Sessions Court refused to consider the same.

Learned APP opposed the application by citing seriousness of the crime.

Prima facie perusal of the record indicates that this is a case of consensual physical relationship between two adults. There is record to indicate that prosecutrix has in fact recorded no objection for grant of bail before the Sessions Court. In view of the same, this Court finds no justification in rejecting the application. In any case, Applicant cannot be kept behind the bars by way of pre-trial sentence. The Applicant has no criminal history behind him and he is not likely to flee from justice. Hence, following order is passed.

ORDER

i) The Bail Application is allowed. ii) In connection with C.R. No.182 of 2024 registered with the Deonar Police Station, Brihanmumbai City, the Applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing PR Bond of Rs.15,000/- with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.

iii) The Applicant shall not tamper with or interfere with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

Page 2 of 3 7^th April, 2026.

20_BA_2188_2025.DOC

iv) The Applicant shall attend all dates of hearing before the Trial Court unless exempted.

v) The Applicant shall not contact the First Informant / prosecutrix in any manner whatsoever.

It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie and are confined to this Application and the learned Trial Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made herein.

Page 3 of 3 7^th April, 2026.