Bombay High Court
DNYANDEO TERAJO WAGH AND ANR.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The court held that bail may be granted in the present case, subject to a personal bond and strict conditions, as the civil reconciliation does not preclude the grant of bail.
Summary
The Bombay High Court considered a bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, by Dnyandeo Terajo Wagh and Jagannath Revannath Jaybhaye, who were charged under Sections 3(5), 316 and 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for alleged cheating related to a sugarcane contract. The applicants argued that a reconciliation exercise had identified an outstanding civil liability of Rs. 73,00,000, of which they were willing to pay Rs. 25,00,000 immediately and the balance in installments. The court noted that bail should not be conditioned on payment but, given the parties' reconciliation and the applicants' assurance, it could be granted with appropriate conditions. It ordered the applicants to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 15,000, report monthly to the investigating officer, and comply with several other conditions, warning that any default could lead to cancellation of bail. The bail application was therefore allowed and the applicants were released on the stipulated terms.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused under Sections 3(5), 316 and 318 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 despite the seriousness of the alleged cheating offences.
- Whether the court may condition bail on the payment of a civil debt arising from a contractual dispute.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316, 318, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 3(5)
- Section 316
- Section 318
- civil reconciliation
- payment conditions
- personal bond
- Maharashtra
Judgment
32. BA-3207-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3207 OF 2026
1. Dnyandeo Terajo Wagh
2. Jagannath Revannath Jaybhaye .. Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Abhaysinh Bhosle a/w Mr. Krishna Rodge, Ms. Sayee Sawant &
Mr. Shardul Shende, Advocates for Applicants
Mr. Yogesh M. Nakhwa, APP for State
Mr. Rohan Hogle, Advocate for Intervenor / Complainant
API Gharte, Alefata Police Station
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : OCTOBER 7, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Bhosle, learned Advocate for Applicants; Mr. Nakhwa,
learned APP for State and Mr. Hogle, learned Advocate for
Intervenor / Complainant.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No. 130
of 2026 registered with Alefata Police Station, Taluka Junnar, District
Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 3(5), 316 and 318 of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS").
3. Mr. Bhosle would submit that the reconciliation exercise with
regard to the receipts and the proceedings and the issue between the
1 of 5
32. BA-3207-26.odt
parties has been undertaken by the parties and an amount of Rs.
73,00,000/- is outstanding. He would submit that to show the bona
fides of the Applicant, an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- is desired to be
paid forthwith to the Complainant. If that is the case, I direct both the
Applicants to show their bona fides straightaway. Applicants have also
persuaded the Court that they shall pay the balance amount to the
Complainant within a period of 10 months from today in four
installments of Rs. 10,00,000/- each and one installment of Rs.
8,00,000/-.
4. Though this Court is completely conscious of the fact that bail
orders should not be granted on the basis of conditions to be imposed
for payment, this is a case where this order is being passed pursuant to
a detailed exercise undertaken by both the parties with regard to the
dispute between them. The dispute pertains to the charges in respect
of sugarcane cutting and harvesting which had been undertaken by
the contractor through its employees and to the extent of which the
said contract had been complied with.
5. Since the Complainant alleged that substantial amounts were
admittedly received on the basis of the contract, bills, invoices and
running bills issued for the work done, both the parties on the
previous occasion were directed by the Court to undertake the exercise
of reconciliation. It is only after such exercise having been
2 of 5
32. BA-3207-26.odt
demonstrated, the aforesaid amount of Rs. 73,00,000 has been found
to be payable. Relegating the parties to a civil course of action would
not be in the interest of justice. Insofar as the element of cheating is
concerned, the Applicants before me have duly acknowledged the fact
of the outstanding amounts. Once that is the position, I am compelled
to consider the case of the Applicants for bail on the basis of the
assurance given by the Applicants. In that view of the matter, the
schedule of payment which is signed by the Advocate for Applicants on
taking instructions from the Applicants' relatives dated 07.10.2026 is
taken on record and marked 'X' for identification.
6. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in the present
case, I am inclined to accept the case of the Applicants for bail on the
assurance given on behalf of the Applicants. Needless to state that if
there is any default, it shall be open to the prosecution as well as to
the Complainant to seek cancellation of this order in accordance with
law.
7. In view of the above, I am inclined to allow the present
Application. Needless to state that the Complainant will only be
entitled to the amounts to which he is entitled to whereas all other
victims / persons who are entitled to the remaining amounts, it shall
be the duty of the Complainant to see to it that they are paid those
amounts and if there is any ambiguity about that, the Applicants shall
3 of 5
32. BA-3207-26.odt
not be held responsible for the same. Hence, both the Applicants are
released on bail on the following terms and conditions:-
(i) Applicants are directed to be immediately released on
bail from prison in connection with C.R. No. 130 of
2026;
(ii) Applicants are directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen
Thousand only) with one or two sureties in the like
amount;
(iii) Applicants shall report to the Investigating Officer at
Alefata Police Station, once every month on the first
Sunday of the month between 10:00 a.m. to 12:00
p.m.;
(iv) Applicants 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 they do so it will entitle the
prosecution to apply for revocation of this order;
(v) Applicants shall not leave the State of Maharashtra
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi) Applicants shall not influence any of the witnesses or
tamper with the evidence in any manner;
4 of 5
32. BA-3207-26.odt
(vii) Applicants shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
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 Applicants.
8. Needless to state that the above observations will not come in
the way of trial as they are prima facie in nature based on the
submissions made and the material placed before this Court.
9. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
by RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
MOHAN AMBERKAR
AMBERKAR Date:
2026.10.07
19:38:00 +0530
5 of 5
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.