Bombay High Court
PUNAM AVADHUT PAWAR AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The applicants, Punam Avadhut Pawar and Ulhas Arun Gaikwad, sought anticipatory bail in a case where the deceased had committed suicide and a pen‑drive recovered from his house contained photographs and call records linking the applicants to the deceased. The prosecution alleged that the applicants abetted the suicide by financial and physical harassment and demanded repayment of a loan. The defence argued that the mere existence of photographs and call records does not constitute abetment, that the applicants have no criminal antecedents, and that other co‑accused have already been granted bail. The Court noted the nine‑month delay in filing the FIR but found no fatal flaw, observed that the investigation was essentially complete, and considered the applicants’ willingness to comply with conditions. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail with stringent conditions and disposed of the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicants are entitled to anticipatory bail despite allegations of abetment of suicide under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
- Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the evidentiary material (photographs, call records) justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 108, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- abetment of suicide
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
- investigation delay
- suicide
Judgment
1 28.ABA-309-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 309 OF 2026
1. PUNAM AVADHUT PAWAR
2. ULHAS ARUN GAIKWAD
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
…
Advocate for Applicants : Mrs. Tanvii Tapkire
APP for Respondents/State : Mr. Anand S. Salgaonkar
…
CORAM : MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.
DATE : 17th JUNE 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Applicants and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The Applicants have approached this Court, seeking
anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No.382/2025 registered
with Shiroli M.I.D.C. Police Station, District Kolhapur for the offences
punishable under Sections 108, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the elder brother of the
deceased committed suicide on 10.03.2025. About one month after
the death of the deceased, the Complainant found a pendrive
belonging to the deceased, which revealed certain information. The
2 28.ABA-309-2026.doc
pendrive contained photographs of the deceased along with
Applicant No.1 (Punam) and her aunt. Several photographs depicted
the deceased and Applicant No.1 together. It also contained recorded
mobile phone conversations with Applicant No.1’s brother, Sagar, as
well as phone call conversations between the deceased and Applicant
No.2 (Ulhas). The FIR was thereafter lodged. Additional material was
also found in the form of handwritten chits by the deceased, wherein
the name of Applicant No.2 was mentioned. Applicant No.2 (Ulhas)
is the real maternal uncle of Applicant No.1. The deceased was found
to have consumed a poisonous substance and committed suicide.
Accordingly, the FIR was registered seeking appropriate action
against the accused Applicants and other persons for abetment of
suicide of the deceased/Sharad.
4. The learned Counsel for the Applicants submits that they
have been falsely implicated in the present crime. Applicant No.1,
Punam, was known to the Complainant, and therefore, some
photographs found in the possession of the deceased at his house
may have shown Applicant No.1 present along with the
Complainant’s brother. However, the mere existence of such
photographs would not, by itself, amount to abetment of suicide at
the behest of Applicant No.1. It is further submitted that there are no
allegations of any overt act on the part of Applicant No.1 which could
be construed as abetment of the commission of suicide by the
deceased.
. Insofar as Applicant No.2 is concerned, his case is identical
3 28.ABA-309-2026.doc
to that of the co-accused Sagar, who has already been released on
regular bail. Similarly, the co-accused Avdhut, whose name was
mentioned in the chit allegedly written by the deceased, has also
been granted anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge. The
Applicants have no criminal antecedents and are ready to abide by
any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, they may
be protected.
5. As against this, the learned APP strongly opposes the
application on the ground that the Applicants are involved in the
serious offence of abetment of suicide. There are several photographs
showing the Applicants and the complainant together, which throw
some light on their relationship. It is further alleged that the
deceased had obtained a loan of Rs. 15 lakhs and that Applicant No.
1 was insisting upon repayment of the said amount. There are also
allegations of physical and financial harassment of the deceased. The
call records and conversations indicate that Applicant No. 2 was in
contact with the deceased. Thus, the custodial interrogation of the
Applicants is necessary to ascertain their role and to collect evidence
regarding the alleged conspiracy hatched by them with the intention
of abetting the commission of suicide by the deceased. The
Applicants are alleged to have committed an offence under Section
108 of the BNS, which is punishable with imprisonment for a term
that may extend to ten years. Hence this is not a fit case to release
the Applicants on anticipatory bail.
4 28.ABA-309-2026.doc
6. I have gone through the investigation papers. The
investigation is almost complete. There is a delay of nine months in
lodging the FIR. The deceased allegedly committed suicide on
10.03.2025, whereas the FIR came to be lodged on 08.12.2025. The
FIR itself shows that the pen drive was found in April 2025, however
there is no explanation for the belated lodging of the FIR in
December, 2025.
. Be that as it may, the other co-accused have already been
granted anticipatory bail and regular bail and the accused Avdhut,
whose name was specifically mentioned in the chits allegedly written
by the deceased, has already been granted protection by the learned
Sessions Judge vide order dated 30.05.2026. Taking into
consideration that the Applicants are not having any criminal
antecedents and are ready to abide by any conditions that may be
imposed by this Court, I am inclined to protect the Applicants. Hence
the following order :
ORDER
(i) In the event of arrest of the Applicants - Punam Avadhut
Pawar and Ulhas Arun Gaikwad in connection with Crime
No.382/2025 registered with Shiroli M.I.D.C. Police Station, District
Kolhapur for the offences punishable under Sections 108, 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, they be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) each
with two solvent sureties in the like amount, on the following
conditions :
5 28.ABA-309-2026.doc
(a) The Applicants shall attend the Shiroli M.I.D.C. Police Station,
District Kolhapur, on every Thursday and Friday between 11:00 a.m.
and 01:00 p.m. till filing of the charge-sheet.
(b) The Applicants shall hand over their mobile phones to the
Investigating Officer for further investigation.
(c) The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence
and shall not influence the witnesses.
(d) The Applicants shall submit their Aadhar and PAN Cards to the
Investigating Officer and detailed addresses and phone numbers of
themselves and two of the near relatives.
(e) A single violation of the conditions would entitle the
prosecution to seek cancellation of the bail of the Applicant.
(ii) The application is allowed in the above terms and stands
disposed of.
MEHROZ K. PATHAN
JUDGE
NAJEEB..
Checking your session…