Bombay High Court
VARSHA RAVINDRA JOSHIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court held that bail must be granted, as the applicant’s continued incarceration is unnecessary at the preliminary stage.
Summary
The applicant, Varsha Ravindra Joshi, was arrested on 13‑12‑2025 in connection with a property dispute arising from a sale agreement dated 01‑07‑2024 for a flat valued at Rs.66 lakh, of which she received Rs.17 lakh by bank transfer and allegedly Rs.40 lakh in cash. She later sold the same flat to a third party on 27‑02‑2025 for Rs.1.25 crore, after which the complainant filed a criminal case (C.R. No. 638/2025) alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The applicant argued that the dispute is essentially civil and that the complainant could have sought injunctive relief in a civil court, making continued incarceration unnecessary. The Court, applying Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, held that bail should be granted as the applicant’s detention no longer serves any purpose at the preliminary stage. Bail was ordered on the condition of a Rs.50,000 bond, monthly reporting, and other standard restrictions, and the application was disposed of in the applicant’s favour.
Issues considered
- The applicability of Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for granting bail in a case involving multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the civil nature of the underlying property dispute precludes the necessity of continued incarceration of the accused.
- Whether the complainant’s failure to obtain injunctive relief in a civil forum affects the bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 483
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 316(2), 318(4), 336(2)(3), 338, 340(2), 341(1)(2), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- Section 483
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- property dispute
- civil remedy
- injunction
- Maharashtra
Judgment
17. BA-810-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 810 OF 2026
Varsha Ravindra Joshi .. Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents
....................
Dr. Uday Warunjikar a/w Mr. Praful Abhiman Patil & Mr. Rohit
Shantaram Patil, Advocates for Applicant
Ms. Anuja S. Gotad, APP for State
Ms. Akshata Ashok Borode i/by S.K. Zende, Advocates for
Respondent No. 2
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 2, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Dr. Warunjikar, learned Advocate for Applicant; Ms.
Gotad, learned APP for State and Ms. Borode, learned Advocate for
Respondent No. 2.
2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No. 638
of 2025 registered with Panvel City Police Station for the offences
punishable under Sections 336(2)(3), 338, 340(2), 341(1)(2), 318(4),
316(2) and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS").
3. Applicant has been arrested on 13.12.2025. Transaction
between the parties stems from registered sale agreement dated
01.07.2024 with regard to flat belonging to the Applicant. According
1 of 4
17. BA-810-26.odt
to Dr. Warunjikar, said sale deed records the consideration amount of
Rs. 66 Lakh for which the subject flat was sold. According to the
Applicant she has received amount of Rs. 17 Lakh by the bank transfer
from the complainant. Insofar as the prosecution case qua the
consideration of flat is concerned, it is argued by learned Advocate for
complainant that apart from Rs. 17 Lakh given by bank transfer to the
Applicant, complainant had also given to her Rs. 40 Lakh in cash. This
fact of payment of cash will be subject to trial, if proven.
4. The date of the agreement is 01.07.2024. If such were the facts
then the remedy of the complainant was to go before the Civil Court
and obtain appropriate injunctive reliefs. That not having been done
notwithstanding the registration of the sale agreement, criminal case
has been filed. Undoubtedly present case stems from a different set of
transaction which has been carried out by the Applicant subsequently
in February 2025. Applicant has sold the same flat by another
registered deed to a third party on 27.02.2025 for consideration of Rs.
1.25 Crore. FIR is filed on 27.10.2025. The aforesaid timeline prima
facie shows that complainant in the present case had all the time in
the world to obtain appropriate injunctive reliefs even otherwise.
Insofar as the lis between the parties is concerned, same emanates
from purely civil proceedings, however criminality has been invoked.
The complicity and crime committed by the Applicant would
2 of 4
17. BA-810-26.odt
undoubtedly be proved at the trial. Insofar as this preliminary stage
for grant of bail is concerned, in view of the aforesaid facts, I am of the
view that Applicant’s incarceration is no longer further required.
5. The Bail Application is granted on the following terms:-
(i) Applicant is directed to be immediately released from
prison in connection with C.R. No. 638 of 2025;
(ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty
Thousand Only) with one or two sureties in the like
amount;
(iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at
Panvel City 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
without prior permission of the Trial Court;
(vi) Applicant shall not influence with any of the witnesses
3 of 4
17. BA-810-26.odt
or tamper with the evidence in any manner;
(vii) Applicant shall keep the Investigating Officer informed
of her 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.
6. 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.
7. 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:
2026.09.02
17:00:41 +0530
4 of 4
Checking your session…