Bombay High Court

MANOJ ANKUSH GAWALIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 12 June 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: ASHWIN D BHOBE

Holding

The High Court allowed the bail application, granting bail with specified conditions despite the earlier non‑bailable warrant.

Summary

The applicant, Manoj Ankush Gawali, sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for offences under IPC Sections 302, 323 and 34. He had previously been granted regular bail in March 2018, but failed to appear for trial, leading to a non‑bailable warrant and his arrest in February 2025, after which he remained in custody for about 14 months. The applicant argued that his illiteracy and miscommunication with his counsel caused the non‑appearance, and pledged to cooperate fully with the trial. The State contended that the Sessions Court was justified in refusing bail but was open to imposing stringent conditions. The High Court, noting the lack of justification for continued detention and the State’s willingness to impose conditions, allowed the bail application with a cash bond, sureties, and strict compliance directives.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite the applicant's prior non‑appearance and execution of a non‑bailable warrant.
Whether the applicant's illiteracy and alleged miscommunication constitute sufficient cause to excuse his failure to appear.
What conditions, if any, should be imposed when granting bail in a case involving alleged murder and related offences.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 302, 323, 34

Subjects

bail
non-bailable warrant
Section 483 BNSS
IPC 302
criminal procedure
illiteracy
trial attendance
bail conditions

Judgment

36-BA-2185-2026.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2185 OF 2026
Manoj Ankush Gawali … Applicant
Versus.
The State Of Maharashtra … Respondent
-----
Mr. Tanmay Kate a/e Prajyot Shinde, Ashraf Kazi i/b Vipul
Dushing, for the Applicant.
Mrs. Shilpa Talhar, APP for the Respondent – State.
API Somnath Panchal, Hinjewadi Police Station, is present.
-------

CORAM : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
DATE : 12th June, 2026.
P.C. :

1. Heard Mr. Tanmay Kate, learned Advocate for the Applicant

and Mrs. Shilpa Talhar, learned APP for the Respondent – State.

2. This Application under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik

Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is filed by the Applicant seeking bail in

Crime No. 413 of 2017, registered at the Hinjewadi Police Station,

Pune, for offences punishable under Sections 302, 323 read with

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

3. Mr. Tanmay Kate submits that the Applicant is Accused No. 1
Arjun 1
36-BA-2185-2026.doc

in Crime No. 413 of 2017. He further submits that there are three

other co-accused in the said crime, which is registered as Sessions

Case No. 7 of 2018.

4. Applicant was arrested on 02.09.2017 in Crime No. 413 of

2017. The said crime is registered as Sessions Case No. 7 of 2018

and pending on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Pune

(“Sessions Court”).

5. Applicant was released on Bail by the Sessions Court in

Sessions Case No. 7 of 2018, vide order dated 09.03.2018.

Paragraph Nos. 6, 7 and 8 of the order dated 09.03.2018 reads as

follows:-

“6. I have gone through postmortem report
which does not give any reason of the death. List
of the injuries were mentioned. All the injuries
seems to be simple, and no cause of death is
mentioned.

7. If act of the accused is considered, it is
alleged that all the accused assaulted the
deceased by kicks and fists blows. No weapon
has been used. The opinion of the doctor does
not support the case of the prosecution. The
doctor has not opined that due to the injuries
Arjun 2
36-BA-2185-2026.doc

caused on the persons of the deceased are
sufficient to cause his death. Therefore, act of
the accused does not fall under Section 302 of
the IPC. At the most, it may be under Section
304 of the IPC, which is punishable for ten years
imprisonment.

8. The case is not made out by the
prosecution to attract Section 302 of the IPC.
The accused are in jail since long. Therefore, it is
fit case to release the accused on bail on certain
conditions. Hence, I record my findings on the
points accordingly and proceed to pass the
following order :

ORDER

1. The application is allowed.

2. Applicant / accused No.1 - Manoj
Ankush Gawali, be released on bail on his
furnishing P.B. and S.B. of Rs. 15,000/-,
with direction to attend the Police Station
on every 15th day of the month, till
disposal of this case.”

6. The Applicant failed to appear for trial in Sessions Case No.

7 of 2018, resulting in the Sessions Court issuing a Non-bailable

Warrant against the Applicant. The said Non-bailable Warrant was

executed and the Applicant was arrested on 03.02.2025. Since
Arjun 3
36-BA-2185-2026.doc

then, the Applicant has been in jail.

7. Upon the Applicant being produced before the Sessions

Judge, Pune, in execution of the Non-bailable Warrant, the

Applicant’s request to cancel the Non-bailable Warrant and to

release the Applicant on bail was declined by the Sessions Court,

on 03.02.2025 itself, for the reasons, as set out in the Order below

Exhibit 103 in Sessions Case No. 7 of 2018, which reads as follows

“ORDER BELOW EXH. 103

Accused no. 1 is produced before the
Court in execution of a non-bailable warrant. He
remained absent almost for two years. The ground
subjected that he was not in contact in the earlier
advocate and being illiterate could not attend the
proceedings are not sufficient. The period of two
years is quiet large period. The accused is facing
trial for an offence of capital punishment. Thus, I
proceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

1] The Application is hereby rejected.
2] The accused is taken in custody and
remanded to judicial custody for 15 days.

Sd/-
Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.”
Arjun 4
36-BA-2185-2026.doc

8. Mr. Tanmay Kate, learned Advocate for the Applicant,

submits that the Applicant is illiterate and that due to

miscommunication between the Applicant and his Advocate

appearing in Sessions Case No. 7 of 2018, the Applicant lost track

of the date in Sessions Case No. 7 of 2018, resulting in the

Applicant’s non-appearance before the Sessions Court. He submits

that the Applicant has been in jail for almost 14 months since his

arrest on a non-bailable warrant. On instructions from the

Applicant, he submits that the Applicant shall co-operate with the

trial and undertakes to appear before the Sessions Court in

Sessions Case No. 7 of 2018 on each date of hearing. He submits

that the Applicant shall not seek any adjournment in Sessions Case

No. 7 of 2018.

9. Mrs. Shilpa Talhar, learned APP for the Respondent – State,

submits that no fault can be found with the Sessions Court, for not

canceling the Non-bailable Warrant. She, however, on instructions

of the Investigating Officer, submits that, since the Applicant has

been in jail for almost 14 months, the request made by the

Applicant can be considered, subject to stringent conditions being

Arjun 5
36-BA-2185-2026.doc

imposed on the Applicant.

10. Perused the Records.

11. The Applicant was granted Regular Bail on 09.03.2018 in

Sessions Case No. 7 of 2018, for the reasons recorded by the

Sessions Court. A prudent person would not risk having bail

canceled for non-appearance.

12. Be that as it may, the Non-bailable Warrant was executed on

03.02.2025, and the Applicant has remained in jail for almost 14

months. In view of the fair stand taken by Mrs. Shilpa Talhar,

learned APP for the Respondent – State, continuation of the

Applicant in jail, pending the trial in Sessions Case No. 7 of 2018,

is not warranted

13. In view of the above, this Application is allowed on the

following terms :-

(a) The Applicant in Crime No 413 of 2017,

registered at Hinjewadi Police Station, Pune,

shall be released on bail upon furnishing a PR
Arjun 6
36-BA-2185-2026.doc

bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five

Thousand only) with one or two solvent

sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction

of the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.

(b) The Applicant shall not, directly or

indirectly, make any inducement, threat or

promise to any person acquainted with the

facts of the case to dissuade such person from

disclosing the facts to the Court or any police

officer. Applicant shall not tamper with

evidence in any manner.

Investigating Officer, Hinjewadi Police Station,

Pune with his residential address and proof

thereof, his contact number and must inform

the Investigating Officer, Hinjewadi Police

Station, Pune, of any changes to this

information from time to time.

Arjun 7
36-BA-2185-2026.doc

(d) The Applicant shall regularly appear

before the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in

Sessions Case No. 7 of 2018, whenever the

matter is fixed, unless specifically exempted

by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune.

14. Bail Application No. 2185 of 2026 is disposed of.

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

Digitally
signed by
ARJUN
ARJUN KRISHNA
KRISHNA RODGE
RODGE Date:
2026.06.12
21:41:30
+0530

Arjun 8

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…