Bombay High Court
KOMAL HARIDAS GARAD (JADHAV)versusPRAFULL SHRAVAN GAIKWAD AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court allowed anticipatory bail, finding no prima facie case and a likelihood of over‑implication.
Summary
The applicant, Prafull Shravan Gaikwad, sought anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 0493 of 2026 alleging offences under Sections 132, 74, 308(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The FIR, lodged by the Medical Superintendent, claimed that the applicant and co‑accused threatened the informant, demanded Rs. 5,00,000 and, in the case of the co‑accused, outraged her modesty. The applicant contended that he had earlier filed a complaint against the Medical Superintendent, that an inquiry was underway, and that the FIR was an exaggerated, false implication. The State and the informant opposed bail, relying on the informant’s statement and corroborating witness testimony. The Court, after noting the existence of a pending inquiry, the lack of any allegation against the applicant of outraging modesty, and the possibility of over‑implication, held that there was no prima facie case to deny bail. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was allowed subject to standard conditions and a personal bond.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail for the offences alleged in FIR No. 0493 of 2026 under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the FIR constitutes a prima facie case or is an over‑implication/false implication.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 132, 308(2), 3(5), 74
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 132
- Section 74
- Section 308(2)
- Section 3(5)
- FIR
- threat
- money demand
- over‑implication
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:42311
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1633 OF 2026
Prafull Shravan Gaikwad
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra
WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3567 OF 2026
IN ABA/1633/2026
Komal Haridas Garad (jadhav)
VERSUS
Prafull Shravan Gaikwad And Another
Mr. S. A. Wakure, Advocate for applicant
Mr. S. B. Jadhav, APP for respondent-State
Mr. G. J. Kore, Advocate for informant
CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 15th SEPTEMBER, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Learned Counsel for the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in
connection with crime No. 0493 of 2026 registered with Omerga Police
Station, Dist. Dharashiv for the offences punishable under Sections 132,
74, 308(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
2. First Information Report is lodged by the Medical
Superintendent claiming that on 20.07.2026, present applicant and co-
accused came to the hospital and threatened the informant of
complaining against her and demanded Rs. 5,00,000/-. There is
21-ABA-1633-2026.odt 1 of 4
allegation against co-accused Dnyaneshwar that he outraged her
modesty by holding her hand. There is also statement to the effect that
Fulsundar and Janabai having intimated to informant with regard to the
applicant and co-accused having taken register from the cupboard and
tried to take photographs of the same.
3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has
lodged complaint and on the basis of his complaint, an inquiry was
initiated. It is his submission that having regard to the said fact, question
of any threat being given to the informant or demanding money does not
arise. According to him, it is a case of false implication owing to the
complaints made by applicant against informant.
4. Learned APP and learned Counsel for the informant opposed
grant of any protection to the applicant. It is their contention that
statement of informant is supported by the statement of witness
indicating presence of the applicant along with co-accused at the spot
and the threats and demand of money being made by them. It is also
contended that statement against co-accused of outraging modesty of
the informant is also supported by the statement of witness Bhosle.
5. Prima facie perusal of the record indicates that the present
applicant has made complaint against Medical Superintendent about
misappropriation allegedly committed in the Sub-District Hospital,
21-ABA-1633-2026.odt 2 of 4
Omerga. There is document on record suggesting inquiry being directed
into the said complaint. In this backdrop, perusal of the First Information
Report appears to be exaggerated. Though the First Information Report
claims that Fulsundar and Janabai has made statement with regard to
the applicant and co-accused having taken register from the cupboard
and tried to take photographs of the same is not supported by their
statements. Thus, the possibility of over implication exists. Moreover
there is no allegation against present applicant that he outraged modesty
of the informant, his liberty deserves to be protected. Appropriate
direction to appear before Investigating Officer will meet purpose of
investigation.
ORDER
(i) Application is allowed.
(ii) In the event of arrest of applicant in connection
with Crime No. 0493 of 2026 registered with Omerga
Police Station, Dist. Dharashiv for the offences
punishable under Sections 132, 74, 308(2) read with
Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, he
shall be released on bail on furnishing PR Bond of
Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one
solvent surety in the like amount.
(iii) He shall attend the concerned police station on
23.09.2026 between 11:00 AM to 01:00 PM.
(iv) He shall not contact the witnesses directly or
indirectly.
(v) He shall not interfere with the evidence in any
manner whatsoever.
21-ABA-1633-2026.odt 3 of 4
(vi) He is further directed to cooperate the
investigating agency for further investigation.
6. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
(R. M. JOSHI, J.)
B. S. Joshi
21-ABA-1633-2026.odt 4 of 4
Checking your session…