P.C.:

1. Heard Mr. Mundargi, learned Advocate for Applicant, Mr. Mukte, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2 and learned APP for Respondent No.1 – State.

2. Present Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of Bharatita Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Applicant seeking enlargement on bail in connection with FIR being CR No.27 of 2026 registered with Mahad Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 4, 8, 10 and 18 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

3. Briefly stated, Applicant is a senior citizen running private tuition classes under the name and style of Sunil Gandhi Classes from his residence at Tambad Bhuvan, Mahad. First Informant – Respondent No.2 was a 10th standard student enrolled in private tuition classes conducted by Applicant.

4. It is prosecution’s case that between September 2024 and October 2024, Applicant conducted extra classes during which he locked Respondent No.2 in the classroom, forceably kissed him and outraged him without his consent. FIR was filed on 04.04.2026 after one year and 7 months and Applicant was arrested on 05.04.2026.

5. Applicant filed Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.53 of 2026 before Additional Sessions Judge, Mangaon seeking grant of bail which came to be rejected by order dated 22.04.2026. Subsequently, Investigating Officer filed Chargesheet No.31 of 2026 before POCSO Special Court, Mangaon registered as Special Case No.30 of 2026. Thereafter, Applicant filed Bail Application in Special Case No.30 of 2026 which was rejected by order dated 11.06.2026. Hence present Bail Application.

6. Mr. Mundargi, learned Advocate for Applicant would submit that Applicant is falsely implicated in the present case. He would submit that Applicant’s Instagram chat dated 01.04.2026 with his friend, appended to Chargesheet, is a cooked up document prepared only after Applicant’s sister decided to take action against Applicant.

6.1. He would submit that case of prosecution is that present incident left Respondent No.2 in a traumatized state however Applicant voluntarily continued his private tuition at Applicant’s classes and cleared his 10th Standard Board Exams with 96.20%, hence such academic excellence does not reflect the prosecution’s theory of Respondent No.2 undergoing severe trauma due to the incident. He would submit that there is an inordinate delay of nearly 18 months in filing FIR and reporting the incident.

6.2. He would submit that Respondent No.2’s fall in academic performance happened due to rigorous JEE coaching classes and his subsequent psychiatric evaluation took place between late 2025 and early 2026 which is admittedly a full year after leaving Applicant’s private tuition. He would submit that Medico Legal Examination Report dated 05.04.2026 records clear finding that there was no external injury noted and FSL Report dated 07.04.2026 states that no potential exhibits are found at the crime scene hence there is no trace of any evidence that links Applicant to the alleged incident.

6.3. He would submit that Additional Sessions Judge failed to consider that Respondent No.2 resides in Panvel with his sister due to his enrollment in coaching classes for JEE examination and he does not reside in Mahad anymore, hence Applicant cannot influence Respondent No.2 or any witness. He would urge this Court to enlarge Applicant on bail in light of his aforementioned submissions.

7. Mr. Karmakar, learned APP would submit that between September 2024 and October 2024, Applicant sexually assaulted Respondent No.2 as a result of which Respondent No.2 struggled with concentration and underwent a serious dip in his academic performance. He would submit that Investigation Officer appended Instagram chat between Respondent No.2 and one of his friend wherein Respondent No.2 confessed the nature of Applicant’s conduct to his friend. He would submit that the nature of the deeds and actions are serious and grevious in nature and therefore Applica