Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13335 (BOM)

PRANJAL DILIP TAWARE v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

BA/3706/2026 · 2026-09-30

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

17.BA.3706.2026.doc HARSHADA H. SAWANT (P.A.) IN IN THE THE HIGH HIGH COURT COURT OF OF JUDICATURE JUDICATURE AT AT BOMBAY BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.3706 OF 2026 Pranjal Dilip Taware .. Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent ....................  Mr. Vipul Dushing a/w. Mr. Tanmay Kate and Mr. Bhagwat Torane, Advocates for Applicant.  Mr. Yogesh M. Nakhwa, APP for Respondent. ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 30, 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Dushing, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr. Nakhwa, learned APP for Respondent. 2. This is an Application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking Bail in connection with C.R. No.382 of 2025 registered with Dighi Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 324(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. The Applicant is a woman and a young offender. By profession, she is a gymnasium trainer and a partner in a shop which sells materials pertaining to health. 4. The record prima facie, shows that the Applicant had explicitly sought Police assistance by calling the 112 helpline number 1 of 4 17.BA.3706.2026.doc of the Police one day prior to the incident in view of the aggravated behavior of the deceased-victim towards her since it has prima facie come on record that the deceased-victim used to repeatedly harass her by visiting her shop premises. The prosecution has, pursuant to the incident in question come up with a story that the Applicant was considered as a sister by the deceased and he had advanced a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- to her and he used to repeatedly seek return of the said amount. There is not an iota of evidence which is collected by the prosecution post-incident which prima facie shows or proves such a case of the prosecution. The case of the prosecution is merely based upon certain statements of witnesses rather interested witnesses which are themselves on the face of record, contradictory to each other. The Applicant is incarcerated since 13.08.2025 for over more than one year. 5. I am inclined to consider the case of the Applicant for grant of bail in view of my aforesaid prima facie observation and findings and more specifically the fact that she is a woman and the bread earner for her family since the entire livelihood of her family is dependent on her. 6. Considering the aforesaid, Applicant is released on bail subject to following conditions:- (i) Applicant - Pranjal Dilip Taware is directed to be immediately released from prison in connection with 2 of 4 17.BA.3706.2026.doc Crime No.382 of 2025; (ii) Applicant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rs. Fifteen Thousand only) with one or two surety / sureties of the like amount; (iii) Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer at Dighi 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 she 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 her 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 17.BA.3706.2026.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. Bail Application is allowed and disposed of in the above terms. H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] 4 of 4 HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Digitally signed by HARSHADA HANUMANT SAWANT Date: 2026.10.01 12:17:06 +0530