Pune POCSO Case: Court Examines Relationship, Medical and Digital Evidence in Accused’s Bail Plea

Pune, November 1, 2026: A special court in Pune has examined medical records, electronic evidence and statements recorded during the investigation while considering the regular bail application of Bhausaheb Vitthal Fadtare, who was arrested in a case involving alleged sexual assault of a 17-year-old girl.

The case was registered at Bhigwan Police Station on May 7, 2026, under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The court's order, dated October 30, 2026, discusses the evidence and submissions made by both sides. However, the available extract does not contain the final decision on the bail application.

Alleged Incident at Lodge Leads to POCSO Case

According to the FIR, the complainant and the accused were acquainted before the alleged incident.

On May 7, the girl reportedly contacted Fadtare while travelling towards Bhigwan. They subsequently met at Rashin and travelled together on his motorcycle.

The complainant alleged that the accused took her to a lodge, where he sexually assaulted her despite her resistance.

After returning to Bhigwan, she informed her family, and a police complaint was registered.

Fadtare was arrested on May 8. Following the investigation, police filed a chargesheet in Special POCSO Case No. 47/2026.

Defence Cites Completed Investigation and Electronic Records

Advocate Dhananjay Bhosale, appearing for the accused, sought regular bail on the grounds that the police investigation had concluded and the chargesheet had already been submitted.

The defence argued that continued judicial custody was unnecessary because no further recovery or discovery was pending.

It also submitted photographs, messages and audio transcripts to support its position that the accused and complainant had previously been in contact.

The defence further stated that Fadtare had no criminal antecedents, maintained a fixed residence and was prepared to follow any conditions imposed by the court.

Prosecution Opposes Bail, Raises Safety Concerns

Assistant Public Prosecutor Prasanna Joshi and investigating officer PSI Amit Patil opposed the bail application.

They argued that the allegations were serious and expressed concern that the accused might abscond, interfere with evidence or threaten the complainant if released.

The complainant was notified about the bail proceedings but did not appear to contest the application, according to the order.

Court Reviews Statements and Medical Findings

During the hearing, the court considered the complainant's FIR, subsequent statement, medical examination records and electronic material submitted by the defence.

The court noted differences between aspects of the initial complaint and the later statement. It also referred to the available medical findings and communications between the parties while assessing the bail request.

The order contains observations questioning parts of the complainant's account. These observations were made at the bail stage and do not amount to a final determination of the allegations.

The complainant's age remains legally significant. Under the POCSO Act, anyone below 18 years is considered a child, and a prior relationship or apparent willingness cannot establish legally valid consent to sexual activity.

Medical findings showing no visible injuries also cannot independently rule out sexual assault.

The court's final decision on the bail application, including any conditions attached to release, cannot be established from the incomplete order extract provided.