Bombay High Court
SHIVANI KEDAR BHASMEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to Shivani Kedar Bhasme with stringent conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by Shivani Kedar Bhasme in connection with FIR No. 235 of 2026 alleging offences under Sections 108, 3(5), 352 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that Shivani, who was in a second marriage without a divorce from her first husband, had been harassing her husband Kedar, leading to his suicide, and presented mobile call records as evidence. The defence argued that the FIR was lodged after a 20‑day delay, the mobile conversations pre‑dated the incident by six months, the applicant had no criminal antecedents, and she was a mother of a 1.5‑year‑old child willing to cooperate with the investigation. Weighing the prima facie evidence against the applicant’s personal circumstances, the Court found that bail could be granted but imposed strict conditions to ensure cooperation and prevent tampering with evidence. Accordingly, the Court ordered the release of the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs.30,000 with sureties and compliance with several investigative and conduct conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged involvement of the applicant in the offences.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the timing of the mobile call records affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the applicant's personal circumstances, including lack of criminal antecedents and having a young child, justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- What conditions may be imposed on anticipatory bail to safeguard the investigation and prevent interference with evidence.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 108, 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- pre‑arrest bail
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- domestic violence
- suicide
- mobile evidence
- bail conditions
Judgment
20-ABA-1762-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
signed by
SONALI ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1762 OF 2026
SONALI MILIND
MILIND PATIL
PATIL Date: Shivani Kedar Bhasme …Applicant
2026.09.09
10:59:03 Versus
+0530
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. …Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2694 OF 2026
IN
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1762 OF 2026
Dinesh Manikrao Bhasme …Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN:
Shivani Kedar Bhasme …Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …Respondent
Mr. Gaurav Kakade a/w. Mr. Alpesh Vegad and Mr. Pradip Naik, for
the Applicant.
Mr. S. V. Walve, APP, for the Respondent-State.
Ms. Anushka Parab i/b Abhay Parab for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Satish Shirsath, API, attached to Panchavati Police Station,
Nashik City, Nashik, present.
CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED : 7th SEPTEMBER 2026
PC:-
1. Heard Mr. Kakade, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
Applicant, Mr. Walve, learned APP appearing for the Respondent-
State and Ms. Parab, learned Counsel appearing for the Intervenor.
Page 1
Sonali
20-ABA-1762-2026.DOC
2. This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking pre-arrest bail in
connection with C.R. No.235 of 2026 registered with Panchavati
Police Station, Nashik City, Nashik, for the offences punishable
under Sections 108, 3(5), 352 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. It is the contention of learned Counsel appearing for the
Applicant that the Applicant is not involved in the crime. He
submitted that the FIR has been lodged after a period of 20 days
and the mobile conversation is prior to 6 months to the date of the
incident. He further submitted that the Applicant has a son of aged
1.5 years. He submitted that there are no criminal antecedents
against the Applicant and the Applicant will co-operate with the
investigation and even the Applicant is ready to handover the
mobile phone to the investigating machinery.
4. On the other hand, Mr. Walve, learned APP appearing for the
Respondent-State and Ms. Parab, learned Counsel appearing for
the Intervenor submitted that the Applicant is involved in the
crime and there are several call records to substantiate the same. It
Page 2
Sonali
20-ABA-1762-2026.DOC
is submitted that the Applicant was married and falsely stated that
the Applicant was granted divorce from the first marriage. It is
submitted that the Applicant was torturing the deceased and
therefore, the deceased died by suicide.
5. Before considering the rival contentions, it is necessary to set
out the prosecution case as set out in paragraph No.2 of the order
dated 12th June 2026 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Nashik, in Criminal Bail Application No.972 of 2026, which
reads as under:
“2. Brief facts giving rise to the present
application are as under:
Dinesh Manikrao Bhasme filed FIR stating that
his son Kedar was serving at Chalisgaon as
Arogya Sevak. He came to Nashik for one year
training. During that period, he stayed at Nashik
alongwith his wife and son. Kedar’s wife Shivani
suppressed the fact that she has not get divorce
from her first husband and performed second
marriage with Kedar. She was demanding money
from time to time from Kedar. She was also
giving abuses to Kedar, due to which he was
mentally disturbed. Shivani used to make phone
calls and was harassing her husband Kedar by
giving abuses. Due to mental harassment of wife
Shivaji, Kedar committed suicide. It is also
alleged that Shivani’s parents were also abusing
Kedar. ”
Page 3
Sonali
20-ABA-1762-2026.DOC
6. Although it is the contention of learned Counsel appearing
for the Applicant that the Applicant is not involved in the crime,
however, mobile conversation which is produced on record prima
facie shows that the Applicant was torturing the deceased and
therefore, the incident has taken place.
7. However, it is required to be noted that the Applicant is a
lady having a child aged 1.5 years. Learned Counsel appearing for
the Applicant submitted that the Applicant will co-operate with the
investigation and that the Applicant is ready to handover her
mobile phone. There are no criminal antecedents against the
Applicant.
8. Thus, in the facts and circumstances, the case is made out
for grant of Anticipatory Bail by imposing stringent condition. In
view thereof, the following order is passed:
ORDER
(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant-Shivani Kedar
Bhasme in connection with C.R. No.235 of 2026
registered with the Panchavati Police Station, Nashik
City, Nashik, the Applicant is directed to be released
Page 4
Sonali
20-ABA-1762-2026.DOC
on bail on her furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of
Rs.30,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the
like amount.
(b) The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police
Station on 10th September 2026 and 11th September
2026 between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00 p.m. and shall
cooperate with the investigation. In addition, the
Applicants shall attend the concerned Police Station as
and when called.
(c) The Applicant shall furnish her cell phone number and
residential address to the Investigating Officer and
shall keep the same updated, in case of any change
thereto.
(d) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat, or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
such a person from disclosing the facts to the Court or
to any Police personnel.
(e) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not contact or influence the
Page 5
Sonali
20-ABA-1762-2026.DOC
Complainant or any witness in any manner.
9. The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.
10. In view of the disposal of the Anticipatory Bail Application,
nothing survives in the Interim Application and the same is also
disposed of.
11. It is made clear that the observation made in this order are
of prima facie nature and the learned Trial Court shall decide the
trial without being influenced by the observations made in this
order.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 6
Sonali
Checking your session…