Bombay High Court
Pranav Girishbhai Shukla vs State Of Maharashtra on 25 October, 2023
Author: M. S. Karnik
Bench: M. S. Karnik
2023:BHC-AS:32056
Urmila Ingale 921-ba-2888-23.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2888 OF 2023
PRANAV GIRISHBHAI SHUKLA ..APPLICANT
VS.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ..RESPONDENT
Mr. Niranjan Mundargi i/b Ms. Keral Mehta, for the Applicant.
Ms. Veera Shinde, APP for the State.
Mr. Harsh Dattani, for Complainant/Intervener.
PSI- Mr. Bharat D. Rane (Pairavi), Kandivali Police Station present.
CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J.
DATE : OCTOBER 25, 2023
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned APP for the
State and learned counsel for the complainant.
2. This is an application for bail in respect of the offences
punishable under sections 376(2)(n), 420, 323, 504, 506(2) read
with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, under sections 3, 4, 5 and 7
of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act and under sections 2(1)(a), 3
and 5 of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human
Sacrifice and other Inhuman Evil and Aghori Practices and Black
Magic Act, 2013 registered on 07/08/2021 vide C.R. No. 720 of
2021 with Kandivali police station.
1/6
Urmila Ingale 921-ba-2888-23.doc
3. There are in all 4 accused. The applicant is accused no. 1. The
applicant was arrested on 08/08/2021.
4. My attention is invited to the FIR lodged by the prosecutrix on
07/08/2021 annexed at page no.35 of the paper-book. The
prosecutrix approached the applicant who was introduced to her as a
saint. The prosecutrix had some problems in her domestic life for
which she was looking for a solution. It is the prosecution case that
the applicant took advantage of helplessness of the prosecutrix and
from the year 2011 onwards, committed various acts which are
offences under the aforesaid sections. The applicant exploited the
prosecutrix almost for a period of 10 years.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the
relationship between the applicant and the prosecutrix apparently
was consensual in nature. Learned counsel relied upon the whats-app
chats which are from page nos. 177 onwards of the paper-book. It is
submitted that the prosecutrix wanted to extort money from the
applicant and after the applicant failed to pay, the complaint was
lodged. It is further submitted that on 12/06/2021, the applicant
had filed a complaint with the Kandivali police station alleging
extortion by the prosecutrix. Thereafter a civil suit was filed by the
applicant against the prosecutrix on 21/06/2021 for various reliefs.
2/6
Urmila Ingale 921-ba-2888-23.doc
The prosecutrix filed a written complaint against the applicant on
21/06/2021 before Kandivali police station. The FIR is filed on
07/08/2021.
6. Learned APP as well as learned counsel for the prosecutrix
opposed the application for bail. It is submitted that the applicant
took disadvantage of the situation which the prosecutrix was facing
and had exploited her. It is submitted that it is only when the
applicant realised that the prosecutrix is likely to file a criminal
complaint to defeat the remedy of the prosecutrix, the complaint and
the civil suit came to be filed by the applicant. It is further submitted
that the whats-app chats cannot be relied upon as they are screen-
shots and there is no certificate issued under section 65B of the
Indian Evidence Act about its authenticity. Further it is submitted
that these are all matters to be decided at the time of trial.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. I have gone
through the accusations made by the prosecutrix and the materials on
record. Prima facie, I find that prior to the lodging of the complaint
and the FIR by the prosecutrix, there is on record a complaint made
by the applicant to Kandivali police station as well as a civil suit
which is filed by the applicant. I may not be understood to have
expressed any opinion in this regard on merits as these observations
3/6
Urmila Ingale 921-ba-2888-23.doc
are only limited purpose of considering the present bail application.
The trial shall proceed on its own merits and in accordance with law
without being influenced by any observations made by me in this
order. Prima facie, I am of the opinion that in the facts and
circumstances of the present case, considering that the applicant was
arrested on 08/08/2021 and now in custody for more than 2 years
and 2 months, with no possibility of trial concluding any time soon,
the applicant can be enlarged on bail as investigation is complete and
charge-sheet has been filed.
8. My attention is invited to the order dated 20/12/2022 passed
by this Court. The said application was withdrawn as the application
for bail was pending before the trial Court which the applicant
wanted to pursue. After the trial Court rejected the application, the
present application is preferred.
9. There are no criminal antecedents reported against the
applicant. The trial is likely to take a long time to conclude. Further
custody will only be by way of a pre-trial punishment in the facts and
circumstance of the case. The applicant will face the consequences
post-trial if found guilty. I am inclined to enlarge the applicant on
bail by imposing stringent conditions. Hence, the following order :-
4/6
Urmila Ingale 921-ba-2888-23.doc
ORDER
(a) The application is allowed. (b) The applicant- Pranav Girishbhai Shukla in connection with
C.R. No.720 of 2021 registered with Kandivali police station shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or more solvent sureties in the like amount.
(c) The applicant shall attend the investigating officer of Kandivali police station once in a month on every first Monday of the month between 11.00 a.m. and 1.00 p.m.
(d) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any Police Officer. The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(e) On being released on bail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the investigating officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change.
(f) Except for attending the trial and for the purpose of reporting to the investigating officer, the applicant shall not enter the western suburbs of Mumbai/ Mumbai suburban district after being released on bail, till the trial concludes.
5/6Urmila Ingale 921-ba-2888-23.doc (g) The applicant shall attend the trial regularly. The applicant
shall co-operate with the trial Court and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.
(h) The applicant shall not leave the country without permission of the trial Court.
(i) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the investigating officer.
(i) It is made clear that any attempt on the part of the applicant to contact, influence or threaten the prosecutrix or the witnesses will be viewed seriously which may result in cancellation of this bail.
10. The application is disposed of.
(M. S. KARNIK, J.) 6/6