Bombay High Court
AVINASH RAJU JADKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the applicant subject to stringent conditions, without prejudice to the merits of the case.
Summary
Avinash Raju Jadkar applied for bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with offences of assault, blackmail and extortion under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The victim, a 19‑year‑old adult, admitted a love relationship with the applicant and corroborated visits to a lodge, which the prosecution also documented. The prosecution highlighted a pending forensic report on a seized mobile phone containing contentious pictures, which had not yet been produced after 14 months. The Court noted the prima facie material, the long delay in forensic analysis, and the applicant's liberty, and directed the prosecution to submit the report but nonetheless granted bail with stringent conditions. The order expressly limited its observations to bail and did not address the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the applicant under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite the nature of the offences and prima facie evidence.
- Whether the absence of the forensic report on the seized mobile phone precludes the grant of bail.
- Whether the admitted love relationship between the victim and applicant influences the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 351(3), 352, 64(1)
- Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority Rules, 1998 — s. Regulation 18(1)
Subjects
- bail
- assault
- blackmail
- extortion
- love relationship
- forensic report
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
27.BA.1806.2026.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.1806 OF 2026
Avinash Raju Jadkar .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents
....................
Mr. Ajay Patil a/w. Mr. Vishwajeet Patil, Ms. Vijaymala Kanade and
Mr. Vinod Chavan, Advocates for Applicant.
Ms. Rajeshree V. Newton, APP for Respondent.
Mr. Viral Mukte, Advocate (appointed) for Respondent No.2.
GPSI – R. U. Kokare, Jejuri Police Station.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : OCTOBER 09, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Applicant; Ms.
Newton, learned APP for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Mukte, learned
appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R.
No.204 of 2025 registered with Jejuri Police Station for offences
punishable under Sections 64(1), 115(2), 352 and 351(3) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. On 07.10.2026, the following order was passed:-
“1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Applicant; Ms.
Newton, learned APP for State and Mr. Mukte, learned Advocate
(appointed) for Respondent No. 2.
2. Applicant is indicted in the present crime for having
1 of 4
27.BA.1806.2026.doc
committed an assault on the victim. The victim is an adult, 19 years of
age and the Applicant is 31 years of age. The victim's statement is
appended at page Nos. 25-26 of the Application. When the said
statement is prima facie read, it is clearly seen that the victim has
admitted that she was in a love relationship with the Applicant. She
has also stated that she had visited one particular lodge in Pune along
with the Applicant on three different occasions. This fact is in fact
corroborated by the investigation whereby the hotel register for the
three different dates showing the presence of the Applicant and the
victim have been placed before the Court, which is seen from page
No. 39 onwards.
3. Mr. Mukte, learned Advocate (appointed) for Respondent
No. 2 and Ms. Newton, learned APP have however drawn my
attention to the charge of blackmail and extortion due to which the
first informant / Complainant had to succumb to the pressure of the
Applicant which is stated in the last unnumbered paragraph on page
25 in the statement of the Complainant. To that extent, learned APP
would submit that though the phone which has the contentious
pictures was confiscated and seized 14 months back, the report is still
awaited.
4. This is a question of the Applicant's liberty. Substantial
material is placed by the Applicant before the Court to show that the
parties were in a love relationship with each other. 14 months is long
period of time; however, considering the vehement request made by
Ms. Newton, I am inclined to give some time to the prosecution.
Learned APP is directed to submit the forensic report of the mobile
phone of the Applicant which has been seized with regard to the
contents thereof pertaining to the present matter in question.
5. Stand over to 9th October, 2026 under the caption "Part-
Heard".”
4. In view of the directions contained in the aforesaid order, the
prosecution is not in the position to place the forensic report with
regard to the mobile phone which was confiscated and seized 14
months ago as the same is awaited. As determined the question is that
of the Applicant’s liberty.
5. There is prima facie material evidence which is gone into
and as observed in the aforesaid order with regard to the victim who is
an adult and who has already in her own First Information Report
statement confessed to be in a love relationship with the Applicant.
2 of 4
27.BA.1806.2026.doc
6. Considering the aforesaid, Applicant is released on bail
subject to following conditions:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with Crime No. 204 of 2025;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rs. Twenty
Thousand only) with one or two surety / sureties of the
like amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at the
concerned Police Station, once every month on the first
Monday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00
p.m.;
(iv) Applicant shall co-operate with the conduct of trial and
attend the Trial Court on all dates, unless specifically
exempted and will not take any unnecessary
adjournments, if he does so it will entitle the
prosecution to apply for revocation of this order;
(v) Applicant shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi) Applicant shall not influence any of the witnesses or
tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
3 of 4
27.BA.1806.2026.doc
of his current address and mobile contact number and /
or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from
time to time, as applicable; and
(viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation
of bail granted to the Applicant.
7. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are
limited for the purpose of granting Bail only and I have not made any
observations on merits of the case. The trial shall be adjudicated on
the strength of the evidence led and strictly on its own merits being
uninfluenced with any of the prima facie observations made
hereinabove in this order.
8. This Court appreciates the assistance rendered by Mr. Mukte,
learned appointed Advocate through the legal aid. Her fees be paid by
the High Court Legal Aid Services Authority as per rules on production
of a server copy of this order and other compliances in accordance with
the decision of this Court in the case of Sanjyot Nitin Telharkar v. The
State of Maharashtra & Anr.1 and the Schedule under Regulation 18(1)
of the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority Rules, 1998.
9. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
1 Judgement dated 25.09.2024 passed in Misc.Civil Application No.134 of 2024.
4 of 4
Digitally signed
HARSHADA by HARSHADA
HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date: 2026.10.09
14:53:10 +0530
Checking your session…