
In a significant ruling on anticipatory bail, the Bombay High Court has underscored the weight of a complainant's retracted allegations in bail proceedings. The Court granted interim protection to an applicant accused under Sections 376(2)(F), 376(2)(N), 313, 504, and 506 IPC, after the complainant explicitly stated in a supplementary statement that the complaint was made out of anger and that no disputes existed between her and the applicant. This judgment reinforces that courts must consider substantive retractions when assessing bail applications, particularly in sensitive offences.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The applicant, Ramesh Ganesh Akhade, sought anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 0116 of 2024 registered at Partur Police Station, District Jalna. The offences alleged included rape of a minor (Section 376(2)(F) IPC), rape by a person in a position of trust (Section 376(2)(N) IPC), causing miscarriage (Section 313 IPC), intentional insult (Section 504 IPC), and criminal intimidation (Section 506 IPC), all read with Section 34 IPC for common intention.
Key Facts
- The complainant filed a police complaint alleging the offences on an unspecified date in 2024.
- On 07.03.2024, the complainant recorded a supplementary statement retracting her allegations






