Bombay High Court
SANDIP BABURAO KANDELKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court held that, given the applicant's satisfactory assurance of future compliance, he is entitled to be released on bail subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The applicant, Sandip Baburao Kandelkar, sought bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in a case involving alleged offences of rape, kidnapping and child sexual abuse under the IPC and POCSO Act. He had previously been granted bail but was re-arrested for breaching a bail condition. The applicant assured the court that he would now comply with all bail conditions, attend all trial dates, and not interfere with witnesses. The court noted that the prosecutrix, now married, had no objection to the bail and that the applicant had otherwise attended trial. Considering the assurance of compliance and the commencement of trial, the court quashed the earlier order and granted bail with specific conditions. The order expressly limited its observations to bail and did not address the merits of the underlying criminal charges.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to enlargement of bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite a prior breach of bail conditions
- Whether the assurances provided by the applicant satisfy the court's requirement for compliance with bail conditions
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 363, 366A, 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 18, 3, 4, 8
Subjects
- bail
- Section 483
- legal aid
- sexual offences
- IPC
- POCSO
- bail conditions
- court order
Judgment
19.BA.3236.2026.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO.3236 OF 2026
Sandip Baburao Kandelkar .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents
....................
Mr. Kuldeep U. Nikam, Advocate for Applicant.
Ms. Anuja S. Gotad, APP for Respondent No.1 – State.
Ms. Tithi Raut, Advocate for Respondent No.2 appointed through
legal aid.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 01, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Nikam, learned Advocate for Applicant; Ms.
Gotad, learned APP for Respondent No.1 and Ms. Raut, learned
Advocate for Respondent No.2 appointed through legal aid.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R.
No.151 of 2015 registered with Lonavala City Police Station, Pune for
offences punishable under Sections 376, 363 and 366A of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 3, 4, 8 and 18 of the Protection
of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3. As per directions contained in the order dated 25.08.2026,
Ms. Raut has taken instructions from the Respondent No.2 -
prosecutrix who incidentally now is happily married and well-settled in
1 of 4
19.BA.3236.2026.doc
life. She would submit on instructions that there is no interference
whatsoever from the Applicant qua Respondent No.2 with regard to
the present case. That is precisely what is expected by the Court in
such matters from the legal Aid Advocate.
4. In so far merits of the present matter are concerned, the
Applicant was already enlarged on bail but in view of he derelicting
and not complying with one of the bail condition, he came to be
arrested.
5. Mr. Nikam would submit that he now has instructions from
the Applicant that he shall ensure that he will attend all Trial Court
proceedings and dates of hearing alongwith his Advocate in future and
would not derelict or commit breach of any of the bail conditions.
Considering that Trial has already commenced and Applicant has
attended the Trial Court otherwise except on the previous occasion due
to which he had to face the ignominy of being arrested, I am inclined
to consider the case of Applicant for enlargement on bail. In that view
of the matter, the order dated 07.07.2026 stands quashed and set
aside. Resultantly, Application below Exhibit-51 in Special Case No.79
of 2022 stands allowed.
6. Applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to
following conditions:-
2 of 4
19.BA.3236.2026.doc
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with Crime No. 151 of 2015;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five
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
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
3 of 4
19.BA.3236.2026.doc
(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 Ms. Raut
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. ]
Digitally signed
HARSHADA by HARSHADA
HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date: 2026.09.01
20:12:16 +0530
1 Judgement dated 25.09.2024 passed in Misc.Civil Application No.134 of 2024.
4 of 4
Checking your session…