: 1 :

12.ABA-2693-21.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2693 OF 2021

Sarfraz Saiyad Ahmad Ansari

... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra

.... Respondent

______

Mr. Satish Muley, Advocate for the Applicant.

Smt. A.A. Takalkar, APP for the Respondent-State.

______

CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

DATE

: 06^th JANUARY, 2022

[THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING]

P.C. :

1.

The applicant is seeking anticipatory bail in

connection with C.R.No.970/2021 registered at Sakinaka

Police Station, Mumbai on 23.7.2021 under Sections 377, 341,

506, 504, 509, 385, 354-D, 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal

Code and under Sections 4, 8 and 12 of the Protection of

Children from Sexual Offences Act.

2.

Heard Shri Satish Muley, learned counsel for the

applicant and Smt A.A. Takalkar, learned APP for the State.

1 of 4

Deshmane (PS)

: 2 :

12.ABA-2693-21.odt

3.

The FIR is lodged by the prosecutrix herself. At

the time of registration of the FIR, she was 20 years of age.

She has stated that in 2015-16, the applicant used to follow

her when she was going to her school. He tried to develop

friendship with her. In 2017, the applicant took her to his

house at Andheri. That time, nobody was present in the

house. At that time, he committed forcible sexual intercourse

against her wish. He also shot video and took some

photographs. Inspite of the informant’

s resistance, he

continued with his act. She got scared and went back to her

house. She was afraid of her family as well. The applicant

used to take advantage of this position and he used to

blackmail her that he would circulate the objectionable

photographs and because of this pressure she used to succumb

to his lust. This went on for four to five years. He also

extracted money from her. On 25.5.2021, he forced her into

marrying him by threatening her to publish her photographs

and video shooting. After her marriage she was taken to a

lodge in Lonavala. The FIR mentions that she was treated like

2 of 4

: 3 :

12.ABA-2693-21.odt

an animal and was subjected to forcible unnatural sex. She

used to be given some intoxicating drug and she was sexually

exploited. He also demanded money from her. The informant

then contacted her parents and went back to reside with them.

The applicant used to threaten her on the basis of the video

shooting and the photographs, which he had in his possession

and this harassment continued for quite some time. Finally

the first informant lodged her FIR.

4.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that

the informant lodged this FIR at the behest of her parents. The

applicant has filed a habeas corpus petition before this Court,

in which notice was issued. He submitted that all the

allegations in the FIR are false. Only because the applicant

was from a lower caste and her parents are not willing to give

permission for their marriage, this false FIR is lodged against

him.

5.

Learned APP strongly opposed this application.

She tendered the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under

Section 164 of Cr.P.C.. In that statement also the prosecutrix

3 of 4

: 4 :

12.ABA-2693-21.odt

has narrated the same instances which she has mentioned in

the FIR.

6.

I have considered these submissions. The FIR

mentions the instances of sexual intercourse when the

informant was still minor. Even then the intercourse was

against her wish. According to the informant, the applicant

had recorded video shooting and had taken some

photographs, based on which he was continuously

blackmailing her. The FIR mentions that she was treated as an

animal, was sexually exploited and was subjected to

unnatural sex. The allegations are very serious. The

informant has stuck to her story in her statement recorded

under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.. At this stage, there is no reason to

doubt her version. No case for anticipatory