Bombay High Court
JAYKUMAR KISHOR BIDICHANDANIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
The court held that no prima facie case was established against the applicant, and therefore bail was granted.
Summary
Jaykumar Kishor Bidichandani was arrested for allegedly accessing pornographic websites and uploading the personal details of a victim and her family, leading to harassment. He was charged under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Information Technology Act, 2000. The trial court denied bail, citing a prima facie case and the applicant's prior similar offence. The applicant contended that the charge‑sheet lacked evidence linking him to the alleged uploads. The High Court found that the prosecution had not demonstrated, through electronic evidence or other material, that the applicant himself accessed the sites or uploaded the information, and therefore no prima facie case existed. Consequently, the court granted bail with stringent conditions, including residence outside Mumbai and regular police reporting.
Issues considered
- Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the applicant under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the IT Act.
- Whether the applicant's prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail.
- Whether bail should be granted despite the nature of the alleged offences and pending trial.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 356(2), 75, 75(1)(i), 75(1)(iv), 78(1)(i), 78(1)(ii), 79
- Information Technology Act, 2000 — s. 67, 67(1)
Subjects
- bail
- prima facie case
- electronic evidence
- harassment
- pornographic website
- IT Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal antecedent
- bail conditions
Judgment
2026:BHC-AS:37812
SA_MANDAWGAD 909 BA 2807-26.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2807 OF 2026
Jaykumar Kishor Bidichandani … Applicant
V/S.
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents
Mr. Sachin Shetye a/w. Ms.Asha Bhambwani, Sudhanshu S. i/by
R.B. Mungekar, for the applicant.
Mr. Vinod Chate, APP for Respondent–State.
Mr. Sumit Sonare (through VC) a/w. Vaibhav Thore for
Respondent No.2.
CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.
DATED : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C. :-
1. Heard. Perused the record.
2. Mr. Chate, learned APP tendered report received from
Police Inspector, Mahim Police Station. It is taken on record and
marked “X”.
3. The applicant seeking their release on bail in connection
with C.R. No. 221 of 2026, registered with Mahim Police Station,
Mumbai, for the offences punishable under Sections 75, 75 (1) (i),
75 (1) (iv), 78 (1) (i), 78 (1) (ii), 79 and 356 (2) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”) and under Sections 67 and
67(1) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short, “IT
Act”), on the report dated 10.04.2026 filed by Respondent No. 2.
4. The prosecution case is that between 13.03.2026 and
10.04.2026, the applicant and his mother through their mobile
numbers accessed certain porn websites and, uploaded the mobile
Page 1 of 4
SA_MANDAWGAD 909 BA 2807-26.DOC
phone number, email ID and other details of the informant and
also of her family members on the said websites. Consequently,
the victim, her brother and mother started receiving WhatsApp
messages, phone calls and emails inquiring and soliciting their
association. Therefore, the aforesaid crime came to be registered
and the applicant was arrested. On completion of the
investigation, the police have submitted the charge-sheet.
5. The trial Court declined to release the applicant on bail
holding that there is a prima facie case of the alleged offence and
that, the applicant has a criminal antecedent of similar offence.
6. Mr. Shetye, the learned Counsel for the applicant, submitted
that there is no evidence in the charge-sheet to indicate that the
applicant has committed this offence. Therefore, he is entitled for
bail.
7. In reply, Mr. Chate, the learned APP and Mr. Sonare, the
learned Advocate for the victim have submitted that the
investigation material show that, at the relevant time, the
applicant uploaded the personal information of the victim and her
relatives on the porn websites and hence, different individual
contacted them for indecent work. As such, there is a prima facie
case against the applicant. The applicant has a criminal antecedent
of similar nature. Earlier also, three such complaints were filed
against the applicant by the victim. Therefore, bail be refused.
8. I have considered these submissions. In order to blame the
applicant for this offence, the Respondent police must show that,
at the relevant time, the applicant had accessed the porn websites
using his or his mother’s personal mobile or computer and, he
Page 2 of 4
SA_MANDAWGAD 909 BA 2807-26.DOC
then uploaded the mobile phone numbers, email ids. etc. of the
victim and her family members. However, in this regard, no
material on record is pointed out by the learned APP and Mr.
Sonare, the learned Advocate. In my opinion, unless this is
properly clarified and shown, it is difficult to prima facie hold that
the applicant had accessed the porn websites and there, he created
the accounts of the victim, her brother and other by registering
their email ids. etc, with an intention to cause them annoyance
and harassment. No doubt, certain social media account/s showed
the mobile numbers of the applicant, his mother and the
applicant’s email id. attached to the information on the web-page.
However, it is not explained as to whether the applicant himself
or his mother or they both had added their said information on the
web-site concern. The electronic evidence collected is yet to be
analysed by an expert. In this background, I find it difficult to
conclude that there is a prima facie case of the alleged offence
against the applicant. In the earlier such case, the applicant is on
bail.
9. In the wake of the above, the applicant may be released on
bail. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
stringent bail conditions needed to be imposed including to stay
outside Mumbai. Hence, Order :-
(i) Applicant Jaykumar Kishor Bidichandani be released
on bail in aforesaid FIR registered with Mahim Police
Station, Mumbai, on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of
Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.
(ii) On instruction, Mr. Shetye, stated that the applicant
will reside in Lonavala, till conclusion of the trial. Therefore,
Page 3 of 4
SA_MANDAWGAD 909 BA 2807-26.DOC
the applicant shall mark his attendance at Lonavala Police
Station, Bangarwadi, on 1st and 16th day of each calender
month between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. till conclusion of the
trial.
However, this condition will not bar the applicant
from entering in Mumbai to attend the proceedings arising
out of the earlier and the present crimes.
(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution
evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon
the prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing
against him.
(iv) On being released from jail, the applicant shall
furnish his contact number and residential address to the
Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case
there is any change.
(v) The applicant shall not indulge in identical activities
for which he has been arraigned in this case.
(vi) It is clarified that the observations/opinion made in
the present Order are limited to deciding the present Bail
application. The trial Court to decide the case on its own
merits, uninfluenced by the said observations/opinion.
10. Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)
Page 4 of 4
Signed by: Sanjay A. Mandawgad
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 16/09/2026 19:08:39
Checking your session…