Film Audition Rape Case: Bombay HC Denies Bail to Accused [Read Order]

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on June 1, 2026, rejected an anticipatory bail application filed by an accused facing charges of rape, violation of privacy, and publishing obscene material in electronic form, holding that there was a prima facie case against him and that custodial interrogation was essential to recover electronic evidence [Abhijit Arun Gade v. The State of Maharashtra and Another, Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1311 of 2026].

Justice Shyam C. Chandak, sitting as a Vacation Court, held that the accused had misused the trust reposed in him by the complainant and that his conduct of obtaining intimate photographs and videos of the complainant and thereafter circulating them on a social media platform indicated that he had the intention to misuse the material from the very beginning.

“The Applicant misused the trust invested in him by Respondent No. 2. Said act of the Applicant has ruined the life of Respondent No. 2. Therefore, there is a prima facie case of the offence of rape,” the Court held.

Background

The accused faces charges under Sections 66E and 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, in FIR No. 21/2026 registered at Narhe Police Station, Pune. The Sessions Court had earlier rejected his anticipatory bail application.

According to the prosecution case, the accused had initially contacted the complainant in May 2024 in connection with an audition for a film project. Following further meetings, a friendship developed between them. In October 2024, the accused obtained the complainant’s consent for a physical relationship by promising her work in a film. He also took intimate photographs and videos of the complainant during this period, assuring her that the material would be kept private. The accused had not disclosed that he was married.

In January 2026, after the accused’s wife came to know of the relationship, both parties decided to end their association. The accused represented that he had deleted the intimate material. However, the following day, he sent a threatening message to the complainant, and the intimate photographs and videos were subsequently circulated on social media. The complainant thereafter filed the FIR.

Court’s Findings

The Court rejected the accused’s submission that the physical relationship was consensual and that there was therefore no prima facie case of rape. It held that the accused had induced the complainant’s consent by a false pretext—the promise of film work—while also concealing the fact of his marriage, and that the consent so obtained was neither free nor valid in law.

On the accused’s contention that he had deleted the intimate material, the Court held that the accused had only made a show of deletion and had thereafter circulated the photographs on a social media platform. It observed that the accused had no reason to take such intimate material of the complainant unless he had intended from the outset to misuse such material.

The Court further held that custodial interrogation was essential for the collection of important electronic evidence and the devices containing the same, and that the grant of anticipatory bail would adversely affect the fair and effective investigation of the case.

Case Details

• Case Title: Abhijit Arun Gade v. The State of Maharashtra and Another
• Case Number: Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1311 of 2026
• Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Vacation Court)
• Judge: Justice Shyam C. Chandak
• Date of Order: June 1, 2026

Appearances:

• For Applicant: Advocate Vipul Dushing (through video conferencing); Advocates Krishma Joshi and Ashish Saxena
• For State: Additional Public Prosecutor Rashmi S. Tendulkar
• For Respondent No. 2: Advocate Jatin P. Karia (Shah), Court-appointed legal aid counsel.

[Read Order]