Allowed

Pawan Alias Tejas Kishor Sarode v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC25 Feb 2026BA/171/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail sought under IPC Sections 306/386/395/504/506 with Arms Act and MCOCA provisions arising from alleged extortion driving a victim to suicide. Court found prima facie absence of abetment element, noted four years' custody and co-accused already released on bail on parity grounds, and granted bail with stringent conditions including exclusion from Kolhapur District.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on P.R. bond Rs.50,000 each with sureties; conditions: no witness tampering, no entry into Kolhapur District except trial attendance.

Pawan Alias Tejas Kishor Sarode vs the State of Maharashtra… — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

12-BA-171-2026 (CR)_titled.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 171 OF 2026

¶4

Pawan Alias Tejas Kishor Sarode VERSUS

¶5

The State of Maharashtra And Anr.

¶6

WITH

¶7

CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 188 OF 2026

¶8

Ravi Dnyandev Donagre VERSUS

¶9

The State of Maharashtra And Anr.

¶10

Mr. Gaurav Kalekar a/w Ms. Poonam Dhotre, Mr. Rutik Kashid, Advocate for Applicants.

¶11

Mr. Anand S. Shalgaonkar APP for the Respondent-State in BA/171/2026.

¶12

Mr. Nitin B. Patil, APP for the respondent-State in BA/188/2026.

¶13

CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 24^th MARCH, 2026.

¶14

P. C. :

¶15

By these applications, applicants are seeking regular bail in

¶16

C.R. No. 577 of 2021 registered with Shivajinagar Police Station,

¶17

Ichalkaranji, District Kolhapur for offences punishable under

¶18

Sections 306, 386, 395, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code read

¶19

1 of 5

¶20

Sajakali Jamadar

¶21

12-BA-171-2026 (CR)_titled.doc

¶22

with Section 3 and 25 of the Indian Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA).

¶23

The prosecution case is that the Applicants/Accused are alleged members of an organized criminal group known as the ‘German Gang’ and acting in furtherance of their common intention, engaged in a persistent campaign of extortion and criminal intimidation. It is alleged that from September - 2021 onwards, the accused persons demanded a ransom of Rs.1,00,000/- from the Victim to secure the release of one co-accused from jail. During this period, the accused allegedly snatched Rs. 25,000/- and a gold ring from the Victim and subsequently subjected him to severe mental pressure and threats of dire consequences to extract the remaining amount. The prosecution further contends that the accused snatched Rs. 15,000/- and a motorcycle from the Victim’s friend. Due to this continuous harassment and coercion, the Victim was driven to commit suicide by hanging on 07.11.2021, leaving behind a suicide note. Hence, the report.

¶24

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants

¶25

are innocent and are falsely implicated in the crime. There is no

¶26

2 of 5

¶27

Sajakali Jamadar

¶28

12-BA-171-2026 (CR)_titled.doc

¶29

material on record indicating any kind of instigation, coercion or any overt act on the part of the applicants to constitute abetment of suicide. As such, the co-accused are released on bail and the applicants stand on the better footing. As such, the applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. The applicants are in custody for more than four years. The trial is likely to take a considerable period. Therefore further detention of the applicants is unjustified.

¶30

Per contra, learned APP opposed the applications submitting that the applicants are members of a crime syndicate and the provisions are of MCOCA are attracted against them. Given the overwhelming evidence against them and considering their antecedents, the applicants are likely to flee away if released on bail or commit a crime of similar nature. Hence, prayed to reject the application.

¶31

Having heard the submissions from both the sides and upon perusal of the record including charge-sheet prima facie indicates that there appears to be absence of element of abetment at the instance of accused person compelling deceased to commit suicide. Applicants are young man aged 26 and 27 years respectively and

¶32

3 of 5

¶33

Sajakali Jamadar

¶34

12-BA-171-2026 (CR)_titled.doc

¶35

are in custody for more than four years. Further perusal of the record indicates that the co-accused namely Tejas and Sunil are released on bail by this Court in Criminal Bail Application Nos.3407/2025 and 3591/2025 vide orders dated 03.11.2025 and 06.02.2026 respectively. The role of the present applicants is more or less similar or lessor than that of the co-accused, who are released on bail.

¶36

Apart from the aforesaid aspects, having regard to the number witnesses which the prosecution proposes to examine, it is very unlikely that the trial can be commenced and concluded within a reasonable period. As such, further incarceration of the applicants may amount to pre-trial detention, which is neither warranted nor justified. As far as the apprehension expressed by the learned A.P.P. in relation to tampering prosecution witnesses is concerned, the same can be adequately taken care of by imposing stringent conditions. Hence, the order :-

¶37

O R D E R

¶38

I. The bail application is allowed.

¶39

II. Applicants - Pawan Alias Tejas Kishor Sarode and Ravi Dnyandev Donagre be released on bail, on furnishing P.R. bond in

¶40

4 of 5

¶41

Sajakali Jamadar

¶42

12-BA-171-2026 (CR)_titled.doc

¶43

the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.Fifty Thousand) each with one or two local solvent sureties, in the like amount, in connection with C.R. No. 577 of 2021 registered with Shivajinagar Police Station, Ichalkaranji, District Kolhapur for offences punishable under Sections 306, 386, 395, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3 and 25 of the Indian Arms Act and Sections 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999, on the following conditions :-

¶44

(a) The applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses and tamper with the prosecution evidence, in any manner.

¶45

(b) The applicants shall not enter into Kolhapur District till conclusion of trial except to attend the trial.

¶46

¶47

(d) The applicants shall submit Aadhar and Pan Cards to the Investigating Officer and detailed address, where they are likely to reside as well as their own phone numbers and that of their two near relatives.

¶48

(e) In case of breach of any of the conditions by the applicant, it is open for the Prosecution to approach the concerned Court seeking cancellation of bail, notwithstanding the fact that this Court has granted bail.

¶49

III. Needless to state that the observations rendered herein are to the extent of this application and the trial Court shall not be influenced by the same.

¶50

[SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.]

¶51

Digitally signed by SAJAKALI SAJAKALILIYAKAT LIYAKAT JAMADAR JAMADAR Date:2026.03.25 10:34:43 +0530

¶52

5 of 5

¶53

Sajakali Jamadar

Pawan Alias Tejas Kishor Sarode v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Alias Tejas Kishor Sarode v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mr Sandesh Arun Nayar vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Santosh Prakash Keluskar and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Ajay Bapu Kamble vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Anil Ammilal Baloda vs the State of Maharashtra

Kumar Alias Khandu Maruti Waghmode vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Akash Ravindra Ringane vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.