Bombay High Court
SHETIBA MAGARDAS PAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The court confirmed and made absolute the anticipatory bail order with additional conditions, thereby disposing the application.
Summary
The applicant, Shetiba Magardas Pawar, sought anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, fearing arrest in connection with a case involving alleged administration of an abortifacient and intimidation of a victim. The offences alleged against her were under Sections 69, 89, 64(1), 351(3) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The trial court had earlier granted interim bail with conditions, including regular reporting to the investigating officer and a prohibition on tampering with evidence. On hearing, the court noted the applicant’s cooperation, the absence of any sexual offence allegation, and a statement that the complaint arose from a misunderstanding, concluding that custodial interrogation was unnecessary. Consequently, the court confirmed the anticipatory bail order, made it absolute, and imposed additional reporting and address‑verification conditions. The application was thereafter disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged offences.
- Whether the applicant’s alleged conduct warrants custodial interrogation.
- Whether the conditions imposed are sufficient to safeguard the investigation and protect the victim’s interests.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 351(3), 64(1), 69, 89
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- abortion
- bail conditions
- legal aid
Judgment
904 - ABA - 411 - 2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 411 OF 2026
Shetiba Magardas Pawar … Applicant
Versus.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents
-------
Mr. Hrishikesh S. Shinde for the Applicant.
Mr. Nitin B. Patil, APP for the State.
Mr. Surjeet Nair for Respondent No.2. (Appointed through
Legal Aid).
Mr. Kiran Patil, API, Mohol Police Station, Solapur Gramin,
is present.
-------
CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATED : SEPTEMBER 8, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard, Mr. Hrishikesh S. Shinde, learned Advocate for the
Applicant, Mr. Nitin B. Patil, learned APP for the State and Mr. Surjeet
Nair, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
2. By this Application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the Applicant seeks pre-arrest bail,
apprehending arrest in connection with Crime No. 209 of 2026
registered at the Mohol Police Station, District Solapur Gramin, for
offences punishable under Sections 69, 89, 64(1) and 351(3), read with
Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
VRJ 1
904 - ABA - 411 - 2026.doc
3. On 3rd August 2026, the following order was passed:
“1. Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 24.08.2026. Learned
APP waives service of notice for Respondents/State.
2. The learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is
the uncle of the main accused, Abhishek Pawar, and that his alleged role is
attributed only to administering a pill for the purpose of abortion, leading to
the illegal termination of pregnancy. The Applicant has no criminal
antecedents and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by
this Court. Hence, the Applicant may be protected.
3. Taking into consideration that the aforesaid submissions, I inclined to
protect the Applicant till the investigation papers are received, subject to
certain conditions. Hence the following order:
ORDER
(a) In the event of arrest of the Applicant - Shetiba Magardas Pawar in
connection with Crime No.209/2026 registered with Mohol Police Station,
District Solapur Gramin for the offence punishable under Sections 69, 89,
64(1), 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be
released on bail on furnishing PR. bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty
Thousands) with two solvent sureties in the like amount, on the following
conditions :
(b) The Applicant is directed to attend Mohol Police Station, District
Solapur Gramin on every Friday and Saturday between 11:00 am. to 02:00
pm. and co-operate with the Investigating Officer until further orders.
(c) The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not
pressurize the prosecution witnesses, in any manner.
(d) The Investigating Officer shall make the investigation papers available
for perusal of this Court.
4. Needless to say, violation of any of the aforesaid conditions may
entitle the prosecution to seek vacation of the interim relief granted herein
above.
5. The learned APP is requested to intimate the victim about the
pendency of the proceedings and submit an acknowledgment on the next date
of hearing.
6. Stand over to 24.08.2026.”
4. Mr. Hrishikesh S. Shinde, learned Advocate for the Applicant,
states that the Applicant has co-operated with the Investigating Officer
and appeared before the Investigating Officer on the dates fixed. He
further submits that the Applicant shall continue to co-operate with the
VRJ 2
904 - ABA - 411 - 2026.doc
Investigating Officer.
5. Mr. Nitin B. Patil, learned APP for the State, submits that the
Applicant's involvement in the crime consists of administering a pill for
abortion and further threatening her not to disclose the incident. He
submits that the Applicant has appeared before the Investigating Officer
and co-operated with the investigation.
6. Mr. Surjeet Nair, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2, on
instructions from Respondent No. 2, who he states is present in Court,
submits that the allegations made by Respondent No. 2 against the
Applicant (Shetiba Magardas Pawar) arose from a misunderstanding.
7. Considering the nature of the allegations against the Applicant
and the absence of any allegation that the Applicant was involved in
any sexual offence against Respondent No. 2 and in light of the
statement made by Mr. Surjeet Nair, learned Advocate for Respondent
No. 2, on instructions from Respondent No. 2, the custodial
interrogation of the Applicant is not necessary.
8. In view of the above, the order dated 3 rd August 2026 is
confirmed and made absolute in terms of Condition Nos. 3(a) and (c),
with the following additional conditions:
Additional Conditions:
(a) The Applicant shall appear before and report to the
Investigating Officer, Mohol Police Station, District Solapur
VRJ 3
904 - ABA - 411 - 2026.doc
Gramin, as and when required by the Investigating Officer
investigating Crime No. 209 of 2026;
(b) The Applicant shall provide the Investigating Officer at
Mohol Police Station, District Solapur Gramin, with his residential
address and proof thereof, his contact number and must inform
the Investigating Officer, of any changes to this information from
time to time.
9. This Court, by order dated 7th September 2026, appointed Mr.
Surjeet Nair to represent Respondent No. 2 under the Legal Aid
Scheme. He has represented Respondent No. 2 in the present
Application, which is disposed of today. The High Court Legal Services
Committee shall quantify and pay the fees of Mr. Surjeet Nair, learned
Advocate for Respondent No. 2, as per the rules under the Legal Aid
Scheme.
10. Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 411 of 2026 is
disposed.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)
Digitally
signed by
VAIBHAV
VAIBHAV RAMESH
RAMESH JADHAV
JADHAV Date:
2026.09.08
20:10:00
+0530
VRJ 4
Checking your session…