Amardep Baban Waghpanje vs State of Maharashtra

¶1

Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE SONAWANE Date: 2026.04.17 18:05:42 +0530 Chitra Sonawane. 27-ABA-976-2026.docx

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Anticipatory Bail Application No.976 of 2026

¶4

Amardeep Baban Waghpanje Age: 41 years; Occupation: Service, Indian, Inhabitant of Alibaug, Raigad Distt., R/o. Flat No.203, B-Wing, Varad Vinayak Building, Panvel Matheran Road, Sukhpur, Panvel, District-Raigad.

¶5

And permanent resident of At-Wagholi, Post-Karmale, Taluka-Alibag, District-Raigad, Maharashtra State.

¶6

… Applicant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra (at the instance of I/P, Samta Nagar Police Station, Kandivali (East), Mumbai) … Respondent

¶9

Mr Vishal V Ingawale, a/w Ms Geeta R Chataule, for the applicant.

¶10

Mr Mayur Sonavane, APP, for the respondent/ State. Dr Samarth Shrikant Karmarkar, a/w Mr Haresh Ramchandra Bodke and Mr Tarun Shailesh Shrivastava, for the intervenor. WAPI Shilha Duthade, Samta Nagar Police Station, is present.

¶11

Coram: R.N. Laddha, J. Date: 16 April 2026.

Page 1 of 5

16 April 2026

Chitra Sonawane.

27-ABA-976-2026.docx

P.C.:

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.148 of 2026, registered at Samta Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 74, 75, 79, 318(4), 318(2), 316(2) and 351(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶18

According to the prosecution, the applicant met the prosecutrix on a matrimonial website in 2020 and induced her into a relationship through repeated assurances of marriage. Exploiting her trust, he allegedly obtained Rs.1,70,000/- via Google Pay between 2020 and January 2026 under false pretences. In 2023, he further procured Rs.4,95,000/- for purported wedding jewellery, had ornaments made, displayed them to her, and retained them, later using them at his marriage to another woman, Sujata, on 15 June 2025. The applicant is also alleged to have extracted about Rs.2,00,000/- in stages for outings and personal expenses. Even after his marriage, he and his family concealed the fact, continued interactions with the prosecutrix, and solicited money. On 1 February 2026, when the prosecutrix visited the applicant’s residence, his brother allegedly abused, threatened, and expelled her. Additionally, on 25 December 2025, at a theatre in Sky City, the applicant is said to have kissed her without consent and touched her

Page 2 of 5

16 April 2026

Chitra Sonawane.

27-ABA-976-2026.docx

inappropriately, having previously molested her on multiple occasions despite resistance. On these allegations, the present case was registered.

¶24

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, asserting the applicant’s innocence, contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. It is submitted that both the applicant and the prosecutrix are consulting adults who were engaged in a consensual relationship. Pursuant to a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, the applicant has already returned the gold ornaments to the prosecutrix. The applicant is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and comply with any conditions imposed by this Court. He also undertakes to surrender his mobile phone, undergo a medical examination and deposit an amount of Rs.1,70,000/-.

¶25

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State and the learned Counsel appearing for the intervenor, jointly oppose the applicant’s request for pre-arrest bail. They submit that the offence is of a grave and serious nature, and express concerns about potential tampering with evidence or the influence of witnesses if the applicant is granted pre-arrest bail. However, the learned APP acknowledges that apart from the recovery of the applicant’s mobile phone and his

Page 3 of 5

16 April 2026

Chitra Sonawane.

27-ABA-976-2026.docx

medical examination, the investigation has concluded.

¶31

This Court has considered the submissions canvassed across the Bar and perused the records.

¶32

Upon perusing the records, it appears that the allegations against the applicant are that he outraged the modesty of the prosecutrix and extorted funds. The record reveals that the applicant and the prosecutrix are of legal age and were involved in a consensual relationship. Their relationship appears to have lasted from 2020 to January 2026. The learned APP acknowledges that the investigation is complete except for the recovery of the applicant’s mobile phone and his medical examination, and nothing is to be recovered or discovered from the applicant. Furthermore, the applicant has already returned the gold ornaments and has expressed his willingness to deposit an amount of Rs.1,70,000/-. To address concerns about tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, appropriate conditions can be imposed. Considering the totality of the circumstances, this Court is inclined to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant. Hence, the following order:

¶33

ORDER

¶34

(i) In the event of the applicant’s arrest in CR No.148 of 2026, registered at Samta

¶35

Page 4 of 5

¶36

16 April 2026

¶37

Chitra Sonawane. 27-ABA-976-2026.docx

¶38

Nagar Police Station, Mumbai, he shall be released on bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount, subject to the deposit of Rs.1,70,000/- with this Court within two weeks from today. (ii) The applicant, himself or through any other person, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station to surrender his mobile phone and undergo a medical examination on 18 April 2026 and later as and when required till the filing of the charge sheet, and cooperate with the investigation. (iv) The applicant shall not contact the victim in any manner whatsoever.

¶39

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶40

Page 5 of 5

¶41

16 April 2026

Amardep Baban Waghpanje v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amardep Baban Waghpanje v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ganesh Mahendra Dhadawe vs the State of Maharashtra

Janak Uttam Jain vs The State of Maharashtra

Rajesh Vitthalrao Bhosale vs State of Maharashtra

Mohammed Mansoor Mohamed Ateeque Ansari vs the State of Maharashtra

Akshay Suresh Pawar vs the State of Maharashtra

Dinesh Ganapati Paranjape vs State of Maharashtra