Ajit Pathrikar IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3530 OF 2025 Rohit Vinod Javare ...Applicant Versus State Of Maharashtra And Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Raj Chaurasia, for the Applicant.

Ms. Gauri S. Rao, APP for the State-Respondent.

Ms. Samiksha Pawar, for Respondent No.2.

PSI – Y. B. Kadam, Kulgaon Police Station, is present.

CORAM DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.

DATED: 14^th JANUARY 2026 PC:-

1. By order dated 25^th September 2025, considering the age of the victim and the incident that took place in the Court as detailed in the said order, this Court had directed that the victim, aged about 17 years and 6 months at that time, being born on 6^th March 2008, be admitted in Shaskiya Mulinche Nirikshan Griha/Vishesh Bal Griha, Near Tehsil Karyalaya, Gandhi Road, Ulhasnagar-5, Thane. She was admitted for a period of 6 months from the date of the said order so that she would attain majority, at which time she would be released.

2. Pursuant to the said order, on 25^th November 2025, despite the directions of this Court to the Trial Court to record the victim’s deposition at the earliest, the trial had not proceeded at all. The Trial Court was once again requested to frame charges and record the victim’s deposition within a period of 15 days from the date of that order. The stay of the victim in the said institution was continued in her interest.

3. Today, Mr. Raj Chourasia, learned Counsel for the Applicant, has tendered a copy of the deposition of the victim before the Trial Court. The same is taken on record. The examination-in-chief and cross-examination of the victim by the Applicant is completed. The Accused No.1, Rahul, is yet to cross-examine the victim. Be that as it may, the allegation of the Complainant, who is the mother of the victim, was primarily against the present Applicant, who is the Accused No.2. I have gone through the deposition of the victim recorded by the Trial Court. She is 17 years and 9 months of age as on date and has stated before the Trial Court that the relationship between herself and the Applicant herein was consensual in nature and there was no force employed on her by the present Applicant, nor was there any ill-treatment by him. She has reiterated that the Accused No.1, namely Rahul, had attempted to sexually exploit her.

4. The parents of the victim are present in Court today. I have inquired with them as to whether they are ready and willing to look after their daughter i.e. the victim without inflicting any physical or mental harm to her. They have categorically stated that they have love and affection for their daughter and it was on the spur of the moment that the incident in Court took place. Both parents have expressed their willingness and readiness to take their daughter back to their home and look after her properly.

5. Considering that the examination-in-chief of the victim is completed and the cross-examination insofar as the Accused No.2 i.e. the present Applicant is completed, I see no reason for her continued stay in the institution. Accordingly, the Superintendent of the said institution is directed to release the victim in the care and custody of Vaishali Surendra Mahabale and Surendra Yashwant Mahabale, the parents of the victim, on production of this order. The role of the officers of the institution is appreciated and commended.

6. Coming to the merits of the present Application, the Applicant seeks his release on bail in connection with FIR No. 81 of 2024 dated 5^th August 2024 registered with the Kulgaon Police Station, Thane Rural for the offence punishable under Section 137(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’). After investigation, Sections 64, 65(1), 69, 71, 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 4, 6, 8 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO Act’) were added.

7. Mr. Chourasia, learned Counsel for the Applicant, submits that the Applicant was arrested on 25^th September

2024. He was 22 years