Roshan Ramchandra Saroj vs State of Maharashtra… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2026)

Roshan Ramchandra Saroj vs State of Maharashtra… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant enlarged on regular bail in Crime No.368 of 2021 on a P.R. Bond of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions: (i) attendance at the concerned police station as and when required; (ii) no tampering with evidence and no attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or persons connected with the case; (iii) not entering the area of Kharghar Police Station; application allowed and disposed of accordingly.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant (accused aged about 20 at the time of the incident, charged in Crime No.368 of 2021 under Sections 363, 376(2)(I) and 366(a) IPC and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 11 and 12 of the POCSO Act for allegedly kidnapping and sexually assaulting a minor girl of about 15 years) is entitled to release on regular bail, taking into account his detention of over four years, absence of antecedents, the victim's conduct during travel with him, and the stage of the trial.

Court's answer

Regular bail granted: the applicant is to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.368 of 2021 registered with Kharghar Police Station, Navi Mumbai, on executing a P.R. Bond of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

Ratio / Principle

Grounds weighing with the Court: at the time of the incident the victim was around 15 years old and the applicant was 20 years old; the victim travelled with the applicant at various places but did not make hue and cry; the applicant has been behind bars for more than four years; he has no antecedent; the trial has commenced and 12 witnesses have been examined.

Key takeaways

Bail conditions imposed: the applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required; shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case; and shall not enter the area of Kharghar Police Station.ratio¶28
Caveat: the observations in the order are made only for the purpose of granting bail; the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by them.obiter¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Shivkumar Dige, J.) allowed Criminal Bail Application No. 3237 of 2024 and enlarged the applicant on regular bail in Crime No. 368 of 2021 of Kharghar Police Station, Navi Mumbai, registered under Sections 363, 376(2)(I) and 366(a) of the IPC and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 11 and 12 of the POCSO Act for the alleged kidnapping and sexual assault of the first informant's minor daughter. Grant rested on: the victim being around 15 and the applicant 20 years old at the time of the incident; the victim travelling with the applicant to various places without making hue and cry; the applicant's detention exceeding four years; his having no antecedents; and the trial having commenced with 12 witnesses examined. Bail ordered on a P.R. Bond of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions of attending the police station when required, refraining from tampering with evidence or influencing or contacting the complainant/witnesses, and not entering the Kharghar Police Station area. The Court clarified that its observations were confined to the bail stage and would not influence the Trial Court's decision on merits.

11-BA-3237-2024 (CR).doc

vai

VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3237 OF 2024

Digitally signed by VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL Date: 2026.02.13 15:56:50 +0530

Roshan Ramchandra Saroj Versus

State Of Maharashtra and anr.

_________________________________________________________________ Ms.Sana Shaikh with Ms.Nisha Lakariya, Mr.Rupesh Ghodake, Mr.Vipul Ghate, Ms.Maya Updeshe and Mr.Pratik Thadani Advocate for Applicant. Ms.Sangeeta Phad, APP for Respondent-State.

Mr.Sumit Patil for Respondent No.2.

Mr.M.D. Shirke,PSI, Kharghar Police Station, Navi Mumbai present in Court.

_________________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 10^th FEBRUARY, 2026. P.C. :

By this application, the applicant is seeking regular bail in Crime No.368 of 2021, registered with Kharghar Police Station, Navi Mumbai under Sections 363, 376(2)(I), 366(a) of IPC, under section 3,4, 5, 6, 11 and 12 of POCSO Act.

It is prosecution’s case that the applicant kidnapped the minor daughter of the first informant and sexually assaulted her. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant there was love affair between the applicant and the first informant. At the time of incident, the victim was 15 years old, whereas the applicant was 20 years old. The victim went with applicant at various places but she did not make hue and

Page 1 of 3

11-BA-3237-2024 (CR).doc

vai

cry. The applicant is behind the bars for more than four years. There is no progress in the trial and requested to allow the bail application.

It is the contention of the learned APP along with learned counsel for Respondent No.2 that the applicant was aware about the age of the victim. He kidnapped her and sexually harassed her. If the applicant is released on bail, he may threaten the victim and the prosecution witnesses and requested to reject the application.

I have heard all the learned counsels, perused the charge-sheet and the documents produced on record. The trial has commenced. 12 witnesses are examined. At the time of incident, the victim was around 15 years of old and applicant was 20 years old. It appears that the victim travelled with the applicant at various placed but did not make hue and cry. The applicant is behind the bars for more than four years. He has no antecedent. Considering these facts, I pass the following order :

ORDER

(i) The applicant be enlarged on bail in Crime No.368 of 2021, registered with Kharghar Police Station, Navi Mumbai on executing P.R.Bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned police station as and when required.

Page 2 of 3

11-BA-3237-2024 (CR).doc

vai

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

(iv) The applicant shall not enter in the area of Kharghar Police Station.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

It is made clear that the above observations are made only for the purpose of granting bail and the Trial Court shall decide the case on its own merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order.

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Page 3 of 3