Bombay High Court

SHRIRAM RADHAKISAN FUNDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED
Bench: R M JOSHI

Holding

Anticipatory bail is granted to the applicant.

Summary

The applicant, Shriram Radhakisan Funde, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (CR No. 265/2026) alleging offences under Sections 143 and 144(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 to 8 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. The FIR was based on a police raid at a lodge owned by the applicant where victim‑girls alleged his involvement. The applicant’s counsel argued that apart from these statements there was no other evidence, the victims had not supported the prosecution under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and the business was actually run by another person with the lodge registered in a different name. The State opposed bail, relying on the victim statements. The Court held that the evidence was insufficient to justify denial of bail and granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions, including a personal bond of Rs.15,000, attendance at police station, and non‑interference with witnesses or evidence.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in view of the allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
Whether the victim statements recorded at the raid constitute sufficient ground to deny bail.
Whether the applicant's ownership of the premises, despite being registered in another name, implicates him criminally.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 183
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 143, 144(2)
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act — s. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Subjects

anticipatory bail
immoral traffic
prostitution
ownership of premises
evidentiary insufficiency
bail conditions
Indian criminal law

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:34138
                                                                  944-ABA-1037-2026.odt



                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1037 OF 2026

                                 Shriram Radhakisan Funde
                                           VERSUS
                                  The State Of Maharashtra
                                              ...
          Ms. S. M. Zaware, Advocate for Applicant
          Mr. N. R. Dayama, APP for the Respondent – State
                                              ...

                                                          CORAM : R.M. JOSHI, J
                                                          DATE  : AUGUST 06, 2026

          P. C. :

          1.          Applicant apprehends arrest in connection with C.R. No.

          265/2026 registered with Police Station Pathardi, District Ahilyanagar for

          the offences punishable under Sections 143 and 144(2) of the Bharatiya

          Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, of the Immoral Traffic

          (Prevention) Act.


          2.          The first information report indicates that on the basis of

          information received with regard to conducting of brothel at a lodge owned

          by the present Applicant, the raid was conducted in which the victim

          females were found. In the statement of these females it is recorded that

          they made made statement showing involvement of the Applicant in this

          crime being owner of the lodge.


          3.          Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that except for the


                                            Page 1 of 3
                                                             944-ABA-1037-2026.odt



alleged statement of the females, which were found at the spot, there is no

evidence to connect Applicant with the crime in question.


4.           Learned APP opposed grant of any protection to Applicant by

referring to the statements recorded by the victim so also in view of the fact

that there is one crime registered against the Applicant. It is his submission

that the Applicant is the owner of the beer bar and lodge, however, the same

is registered in someone’s name.


5.           Perusal of the investigation papers indicates that the victim girls

have not supported the case of prosecution before the Magistrate at the time

of recording of their statement under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita. Apart from this, the record indicates that the business of

Kalakendra is conducted in the said premises by someone else than the

Applicant. Hence, liberty of the Applicant deserves to be protected. Hence,

the order:

                                   ORDER

(i)    Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed.

(ii)   In the event of arrest of the Applicant in connection with C.R.
       No. 265/2026 registered with Police Station Pathardi, District
       Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under Sections 143
       and 144(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and
       Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention)
       Act, he shall be released on bail on furnishing PR bond of Rs.
       15,000 (Rupees Fifteen Thousand Only) with one surety in
       the like amount.

                                   Page 2 of 3
                                                              944-ABA-1037-2026.odt




(iii)    He shall attend the concerned police station as and when
         required.

(iv)     He shall not contact the witnesses directly or indirectly.

(v)      He shall not interfere with the evidence in any manner
         whatsoever.

(vi)     He is further directed to cooperate the investigating agency
         for further investigation.



                                                        (R. M. JOSHI, J.)
Malani




                                     Page 3 of 3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…