Bombay High Court
PRAN DNYANESHWAR YEWALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the applicant.
Summary
The applicant, Pran Dnyaneshwar Yewale, sought regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for offences under Sections 108, 115(2), 351(3) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 relating to the suicide of a 22‑year‑old victim. The prosecution’s case relied on a suicide note that primarily implicated another accused, Ranjeet Deshmukh, and an audio call transcript suggesting the applicant had threatened the complainant. The applicant had previously absconded, leading to a warrant and proclamation, but surrendered thereafter. The Court examined whether these circumstances justified denial of bail and concluded that a prima facie case for bail existed, granting it with strict conditions. The bail order was issued, directing release on a bond, reporting requirements, and prohibitions on tampering with evidence or leaving the state.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 despite the seriousness of the offences and prior absconding.
- Whether the suicide note and the audio call transcript constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail.
- Whether the applicant's alleged involvement as a co‑accused warrants continued detention.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 108, 115(2), 3(5), 351(3)
Subjects
- bail
- suicide
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 483
- abetment
- absconding
- conditions of bail
Judgment
11. BA-3505-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3505 OF 2026
Pran Dnyaneshwar Yewale .. Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Rohan Hogle a/w Mr. Sainath S. Garade, Advocates for
Applicant
Ms. Shilpa G. Talhar, APP for State
Mr. Hrishikesh Ghorpade a/w Mr. Siddharth Sutaria, Advocates for
Intervenor
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 21, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Hogle, learned Advocate for Applicant and Ms. Talhar,
learned APP for State.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for regular bail in FIR bearing C.R. No. 243 of
2025 registered with Vadgaon Maval Police Station, District Pune for
the offences punishable under Sections 108, 115(2), 351(3) read with
Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.0
3. Applicant is indicted and arraigned as accused No. 3 in the
present crime. In the FIR, he is accused No. 2. There are 3 three
accused persons in the FIR. Accused No. 1 is Ranjeet R. Deshmukh,
accused No. 2 is Abhishek A. Dhore and accused No. 3 - Pran
1 of 5
11. BA-3505-26.odt
Dnyaneshwar Yewale i.e. present Applicant before me. The deceased
victim was 22 years old and she has committed suicide by hanging in
her bedroom on 23.07.2025.
4. According to the prosecution case and the investigation done,
the incidents between accused No. 1 Ranjeet R. Deshmukh and the
deceased victim ranged between 01.12.2024 to 24.07.2025. At the
center of controversy is the suicide note, copy of which is appended at
page No. 218 of the Application. I have perused the said note with the
able assistance of the learned Advocates appearing for the parties at
the bar. The note, prima facie, clearly implicates accused No. 1 -
Ranjeet R. Deshmukh in toto. In the said note, the victim has referred
to 3 to 4 friends of Ranjeet R. Deshmukh remaining present with him
at all times. The learned Advocate appearing for the Complainant,
who is the father of the victim, would argue that the same will have to
be interpreted by the Court for indictment of the other accused
persons also to be complicit in the crime. I am afraid that I cannot do
so because the suicide note is explicitly clear and it is unambiguous
when read and it points a finger to the relationship between the victim
and Ranjeet R. Deshmukh only. However, certain startling facts have
now been recovered.
5. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has placed before me a
transcript of the audio call between the Complainant and the
2 of 5
11. BA-3505-26.odt
Applicant which is one day prior to the alleged incident. When I asked
the date, he informed that this transcript has been recorded on
23.07.2025 which is the date of the incident. Copy of the same is given
to the concerned IO who is present in Court.
6. From the material placed on record, it is prima facie seen that
according to the first informant, after the date of incident on
27.07.2025, it is the Complainant's case that he had received a
threatening call from the present Applicant. It is seen from the record
that accused No. 1 - Ranjeet R. Deshmukh, who is the principal
protagonist in the present case, has been released on bail. Equally,
accused No. 2 - Abhishek A. Dhore is also released on bail. One of the
reasons as to why the present Applicant had to surrender was because
he was absconding and a standing warrant was issued and
proclamation was also issued pursuant to which he surrendered.
Insofar as this issue is concerned that cannot be held against the
Applicant for grant of bail. Applicant has placed the transcript of the
audio call between the Complainant and the Applicant one day prior
to the incident in question which prima facie, when read shows that
the first informant himself is a person who has abetted the said crime.
That apart, in so far as the suicide note is concerned that also appears
to be antedated.
3 of 5
11. BA-3505-26.odt
7. Prosecution is directed to consider the aforesaid submissions
made by the Applicant in accordance with law. Insofar as grant of bail
is concerned, prima facie case has been made out by the Applicant
before me in view of his nexus with the principal accused persons in
the present crime and hence he is granted bail. The Applicant is
released on bail on the following terms and conditions:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with C.R. No. 243 of 2025;
(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 sureties in the like
amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at
Vadgaon Maval Police Station, once every month on the
first Sunday 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
4 of 5
11. BA-3505-26.odt
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
(viii)Any infraction of the conditions shall entail cancellation
of bail granted to the Applicant.
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:
2026.09.21
19:19:01 +0530
5 of 5
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.