Bombay High Court
Ravindra Bhagwant Datir vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 9 December, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:35694
933 BA No.1822.2025
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1822 OF 2025
RAVINDRA BHAGWANT DATIR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
***
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. A. N. Barhate Patil
APP for Respondents-State : Ms. R. R. Tandale
Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Ms. Smita Kasture (Appointed)
***
CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.
Date : 9th December, 2025
ORDER :-
1. The applicant has approached this Court seeking regular bail in connection with FIR dated 14.07.2024 bearing Crime No. 391 of 2024 registered with Loni Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(1) and 351(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 6 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that, the victim's father reported that his daughter left for college as usual at 11:00 am on 13/07/2024. At approximately 11:30 am, the college notified him of her absence, prompting the informant to contact the victim's 933 BA No.1822.2025 -2- friend. The friend stated that because the victim was experiencing swell of the partoid glands, they had attempted to visit a hospital, which they found closed; subsequently, the victim reportedly boarded on a private vehicle for Loni to have further treatment. After an unsuccessful search for his daughter, the informant filed a missing person report.
3. The prosecution further alleges that a supplementary statement from the victim was recorded on 24.07.2024. In this statement, a relative of the informant reported seeing the applicant, Ravindra, drop the victim off at her house; despite the relative's attempt to intervene, the applicant managed to escape. The victim subsequently revealed that the accused lured her with the promise of medical treatment in Loni, but instead took her to a hotel in Sinnar where she was forcibly sexually assaulted and photographed. The applicant eventually returned her home on a motorcycle at approximately 9:30 pm on 22.07.2024.
4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the initial FIR only concerned the missing daughter of the informant and contained no allegations linking the applicant to her disappearance. It is further contended that the victim accompanied the applicant for over eight days and was fully aware of the 933 BA No.1822.2025 -3- consequences of her relationship with him. The investigation is complete, the charge-sheet has been filed, and nothing further is to be recovered from the applicant. As such, prayed that application may be allowed.
5. The learned APP vehemently opposed the application, submitting that the accused sexually exploited the victim and captured photographs of the assault. Committed the serious nature of the offense, it is contended that the applicant's release on bail would create a significant risk of tampering with evidence. Consequently, the APP prays for the application to be rejected.
6. Considering the submissions from both sides and perusing the record, including the charge-sheet, prima facie, appears that the victim accompanied the applicant and they stayed together until 22.07.2024. Upon her return, the victim implicated the applicant, asserting that he sexually assaulted her and captured photographs of the act.
7. Prima facie, the victim appears to have consciously participated in the acts, prima facie indicating an awareness of the consequences of her actions. Thus, the emerging factual matrix does not, at this stage, reflect active inducement or coercive conduct on the part of the accused.
933 BA No.1822.2025-4-
8. Nevertheless, the investigation of the case has been completed and the charge-sheet is also filed. Nothing remains to be recovered at the instance of applicant. Thus, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the accused behind the bar.
9. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant's deserves to be entitled for bail. The learned APP's apprehension about tampering with the prosecution evidence can be adequately taken care of by imposing stringent conditions.
10. The High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad, to pay the fees to the learned counsel appointed on behalf of respondent No. 2, as per rules.
11. Resultantly, following order is passed :-
ORDER (I) Application is allowed.
(II) Applicant - Ravindra Bhagwanta Datir be released on regular bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs. 50,000/-
(Fifty Thousand Only) with one or two local solvent sureties in the like amount, in connection with Crime No. 391 of 2024 registered with Loni Police Station, Dist. Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 64(1) and 351(3) of Bharatiya 933 BA No.1822.2025 -5- Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 6 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, on the following conditions :-
(a) The applicant shall attend each and every date of the Trial Court, unless exempted by the Trial Court.
(b) The applicant shall not enter into the village Dadh Khurd, Tq. Sangamner, Dist. Ahmednagar, till conclusion of trial.
(c) The Applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner.
(d) The applicant shall submit his Aadhar and Pan Card to the Investigation Officer and detailed addresses and phone numbers of applicant and two of the near relatives.
(e) In case of breach of any of the conditions by the applicant, it is open for the Prosecution to move this Court seeking cancellation of bail.
(III) Needless to states that the observations rendered herein are to the extent of this application and the trial court shall not be influenced by the same.
(SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.) Omkar Joshi