Mumbai, Maharashtra – A Sessions Court in Greater Mumbai has granted bail to Kamleshkumar Shrinath Yadav, the primary accused in a case involving serious charges of rape, gang rape, administering stupefying substances, sexual assault, criminal intimidation, and violations under the Information Technology (IT) Act. The order was passed by Additional Sessions Judge Sonali P. Agarwal on April 11, 2022, in connection with C.R. No. 09 of 2022 registered at Kurla Police Station.

Yadav was arrested for offenses punishable under Sections 376 (rape), 376(d) (gang rape), 328 (causing hurt by means of poison, etc., with intent to commit an offense), 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Sections 67 (publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form) and 67(A) (publishing or transmitting material containing sexually explicit act, etc., in electronic form) of The Information Technology Act, 2000.

Allegations of a Protracted Ordeal

According to the prosecution, the complainant, a Field Officer, and the accused, a Manager, worked together at Sarthi Finance Consultancy. Their professional relationship allegedly evolved into a manipulative and abusive one.

The victim claims that in July 2017, Yadav committed rape at her home, promising marriage afterward. When she pressed for marriage, he allegedly evaded, citing business ventures. He later left Sarthi Finance and started “Krupa Charitable Foundation,” compelling the informant to join him.

A more disturbing incident is alleged to have occurred in October 2019. Yadav reportedly convinced the informant to travel to Banaras (Varanasi) under the pretext of opening a new office in her name. There, at Hindu University, she was allegedly given milk laced with a “stupefying substance.” Subsequently, Yadav and a co-accused reportedly committed sexual acts with her and video-recorded the entire incident.

Upon returning to Mumbai, the informant allegedly discovered that Yadav was already married. When confronted, he reportedly threatened to viral the compromising video, forcing her to continue working for his foundation. Similar threats were allegedly used to pressure her into joining his new venture, “Purvik Finance Consultancy,” in March 2021. The informant claims Yadav continued to demand money and sexual favors under the constant threat of video dissemination. The final alleged incident of forced sexual relations occurred on December 12, 2021, in a lodge. The victim also claimed that when she resisted meeting him, he pressured her to “sell her uterus/ovary” and threatened to implicate her in false money cases if she refused, ultimately leading her to lodge the police report.

Accused’s Defence: Mentor, Friend, and Alleged Financial Misappropriation

Kamleshkumar Shrinath Yadav, represented by Advocate Mr. Vivek Umesh Koppikar, presented a counter-narrative, strongly denying the allegations. He stated that he is a married man with a wife, daughter, and son, and is involved in managing loan accounts for “Mahila Bachat Gats” (women’s self-help groups).

His defense hinged on several key points:

• Mentor-Friend Relationship: He contended that his relationship with the informant was strictly that of a mentor and a close friend, denying any sexual intercourse.
• Shared Accommodation for Economy: He claimed they shared rooms on “many occasions” for “economy purpose with no intention of carrying their relation beyond the limits of their friendship.”
• Financial Assistance: Yadav asserted that he financially helped the informant directly or through friends.
• Allegations of Misappropriation: He accused the informant of misappropriating funds collected on behalf of “Suvidha Patpedhi” in 2021. He claimed that the informant and her mother even gave a written request to the bank management and to him, promising to return the amount to avoid a police complaint for cheating. He argued that the money he was “demanding” was for returning these misappropriated funds.
• Knowledge of Marital Status: Yadav stated that the informant was aware of his marital status as she was introduced to his wife when presenting herself as a surety for her husband in an FIR filed by Andheri Police against the informant and other accused.
• Varanasi Trip: He clarified that the trip to Prayagraj (Varanasi) was intended for the entire office team, not solely for business, and that tickets were cancelled due to accommodation issues. He also pointed out a discrepancy in the informant’s stated dates for the alleged gang rape in Varanasi (October 20-22, 2019, versus his claim of May 20-22, 2019), questioning how a victim could forget such crucial details.
• False Complaint Threat: Yadav alleged that the informant and her mother threatened to file a rape complaint if he pursued a police complaint regarding the financial fraud. He also mentioned that he had filed a cheating complaint at Sakinaka Police Station, which was not registered as an FIR.
• WhatsApp Chats & Surrogate Pregnancy: He presented “healthy WhatsApp Chats” over two years, including “several midnight chats,” as proof of his role as a mentor. He also claimed the informant, of her own volition, intended to volunteer for “surrogate pregnancy” without her parents’ consent and sought his advice and support.

Court’s Observations and Decision

The prosecution objected to bail, fearing that Yadav might threaten the informant or obstruct the investigation, stating that his mobile had been seized and a spot panchnama drawn.

However, the court noted several points favouring the accused:

• Delay in FIR: The court highlighted the significant delay in filing the FIR, noting that the first alleged rape occurred in 2017, threats were allegedly made in 2019, but the complaint was lodged only in 2022.
• Continued Association: The informant continued to work with the accused for two years even after the first alleged rape and allegedly travelled with him and stayed in shared rooms.
• Marital Status Knowledge: The court considered the accused’s claim that the informant was aware of his marital status since 2019, contrasting it with the prosecution’s narrative.
• Photographic Evidence: The accused submitted photographs from the trip, which he contended showed the informant appeared “happy,” thereby “falsifying” the contention of gang rape during that period.
• No Criminal Antecedents: Crucially, no prior criminal antecedents of the accused were brought on record by the prosecution.

The court concluded that, considering these circumstances, “a possibility that the contention of accused he has not committed rape cannot be fully ruled out. It is a matter of trial whether accused has committed such offence or not.”

Stating that “no purpose is going to be served by keeping accused behind the bar,” the court decided to grant bail.

Bail Conditions

Kamleshkumar Shrinath Yadav was released on bail upon furnishing a Personal Bond and Solvent Bail (PB and SB) of ₹15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only), with one or more sureties of the like amount, subject to the following conditions:

• He must not threaten or cause injury to the informant.
• He must not tamper with prosecution evidence.
• He must attend the concerned Police Station as and when required by the Investigating Officer for a period of six months from the date of the order.
• He shall not directly or indirectly induce, threaten, or promise any person acquainted with the facts of the case to dissuade them from disclosing facts to the court or police.
• He must furnish his mobile number, phone number, and all addresses (permanent, temporary, and postal) to the Investigating Officer and promptly inform of any changes.

The Criminal Bail Application No. 691 of 2022 stands disposed of accordingly. The case will now proceed to trial, where the veracity of the serious allegations and the defense’s counter-claims will be thoroughly examined.