Bombay High Court

PRASHANT DHANPAL GANDHIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 19 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court held that anticipatory bail is appropriate as the offences, except for Section 123 BNS, are bailable and the applicant’s undertaking is acceptable.

Summary

The High Court of Bombay considered an anticipatory bail application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by Prashant Dhanpal Gandhi, who faced charges under several provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant argued that all offences except the one under Section 123 of the BNS were bailable and that the Supreme Court was still examining the applicability of Section 123 to similar cases. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offence and five antecedent allegations. The Court noted that the pending Supreme Court decision did not preclude granting bail for the other bailable offences and accepted the applicant’s undertaking not to deal in Gutkha or pan masala with tobacco, following the Supreme Court’s precedent in Lolage. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail with a cash bond and a series of strict conditions, including regular police reporting and compliance with the undertaking.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when one of the charges (Section 123 BNS) is non‑bailable and pending Supreme Court clarification.
Whether the applicant’s undertaking, modeled on the Supreme Court’s condition in Lolage, satisfies the requirements for bail.
Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences justifies denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 223, 275
Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 — s. 123, 26(2), 26(2)(i), 27(3)(d), 27(3)(e), 59(iii)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 482
Food Safety Act
non‑bailable offence
undertaking
Supreme Court precedent
bail conditions
criminal procedure

Judgment

                                                 907-ABA-1838-2026.DOC




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
         ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1838 OF 2026


Prashant Dhanpal Gandhi                              …Applicant
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra                             …Respondent


Mr. Prashant S. Hagare a/w. Ms. Ekta Patil, for the Applicant.
Mr. Mayur Sonawane, APP, for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Kailash Kadam, Indapur Police Station, Pune Rural, Pune,
present.


                       CORAM:      MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
                       DATED :     19th AUGUST 2026
PC:-


1.       Heard Mr. Hagare, learned Counsel appearing for the

Applicant and Mr. Sonawane, learned APP appearing for the

Respondent-State.



2.       This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (“BNSS”) seeking pre-arrest bail

in connection with C.R. No.222 of 2026 registered with Indapur

Police Station, Pune Rural, Pune, for the offences punishable under

Sections 26(2), 26(2)(i), 123, 27(3)(d), 27(3)(e), 59(iii) of the




                                 Page 1
Sonali
                                               907-ABA-1838-2026.DOC




Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 and Sections 223 and 275 of

the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).



3.       It is the submission of Mr. Hagare, learned Counsel that

except the offence under Section 123 of the BNS, all other offences

are bailable offences. He submits that as far as Section 123 of the

BNS is concerned, the Supreme Court is considering the

applicability of Section 123 (i.e. Section 328 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860) to the similar cases. He therefore, states that the

Anticipatory Bail Application be allowed.



4.       On the other hand, Mr. Sonawane, learned APP strongly

opposes the Anticipatory Bail Application. He submits that the

offence is very serious and therefore, the Anticipatory Bail

Application be rejected. On instructions, he submits that there are

five antecedents against the Applicant.



5.       Mr. Hagare, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant

submits that all five antecedents are disclosed in the Application

and they are of the same nature.




                               Page 2
Sonali
                                                       907-ABA-1838-2026.DOC




6.       Mr. Sonawane, learned APP submits that if this Court is

inclined to grant Anticipatory Bail then, the Applicant be directed

to give undertaking in terms of order of the Supreme Court in the

case of Abhijit Jitendra Lolage vs. State of Maharashtra1 and more

particularly, relies on the following condition imposed by the

Supreme Court in case of similar offences:



          It is deemed appropriate to impose the condition –
          “I, Abhijeet Jitendra Lolage do undertake to not
          deal with Gutkha, that is, Pan Masala with
          Tobacco.” In case, the appellant-Abhijeet Jitendra
          Lolage violates the terms and conditions of bail,
          including the undertaking imposed, it would be
          open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of
          bail.”

                                                  (Emphasis added)


7.       Mr. Hagare, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant

submits that the Applicant has filed the undertaking dated 18 th

August 2026 in this Court in above terms.



8.       The Supreme Court in the said order has imposed the above

condition in case of similar offence.




1        SLP (Crl.) Diary No.2806/2023




                                         Page 3
Sonali
                                                 907-ABA-1838-2026.DOC




9.       Perusal of the record shows that except the offence under

Section 123 of the BNS, the other offences are bailable offences.

The issue whether Section 123 of the BNS will apply to similar

cases is pending before the Supreme Court. As the Applicant has

given the undertaking that he will not deal with Gutkha and

Tobacco products in any manner whatsoever. The said undertaking

is accepted.



10.      Accordingly, the case is made out for grant of Anticipatory

Bail. In view thereof, the following order is passed:


                              ORDER

         (a)   In the event of arrest of the Applicant-Prashant

               Dhanpal Gandhi in connection with C.R. No.222 of

               2026 registered with the Indapur Police Station, Pune

               Rural, Pune, the Applicant is directed to be released

               on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of

               Rs.1,00,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the

               like amount.

         (b)   The Applicant shall attend the concerned Police

               Station on every Sunday between 11:00 a.m. to 02:00




                                 Page 4
Sonali
                                                  907-ABA-1838-2026.DOC




               p.m.

         (c)   The Applicant to strictly comply with the undertaking

               accepted by this Court that the Applicant will not deal

               with banned products i.e. Gutkha, Pan Masala with

               Tobacco products in any manner whatsoever.

         (d)   The Applicant shall furnish his cell phone number and

               residential address to the Investigating Officer and

               shall keep the same updated, in case of any change

               thereto.

         (e)   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.

         (f)   The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution

               evidence and shall not contact or influence the

               Complainant or any witness in any manner.

         (g)   The Applicant shall not leave India without prior

               permission of the Court.

         (h)   In case, the Applicant violates the terms and




                                 Page 5
Sonali
                                                                 907-ABA-1838-2026.DOC




                             conditions of bail, including the undertaking, it would

                             be open to the prosecution to seek cancellation of bail.


              11.      The Anticipatory Bail Application is disposed of accordingly.




                                                          [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]




       Digitally
       signed by
       SONALI
SONALI MILIND
MILIND PATIL
PATIL Date:
       2026.08.24
       10:59:40
       +0530




                                                Page 6
              Sonali

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…