Sadanand Appa Dhumal v. The Sfate Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 24 OF 2026 Sadanand Appa Dhumal ...Applicant Versus.

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

...Respondents

------- Mr. Pranav Bhoite, learned Advocate for the Applicant. Mrs. Anuja S. Gotad, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. Ms. Saima Ansari, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2. ------- CORAM :

ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.

DATE :

12th MARCH 2026.

P.C. :

1.

Heard Mr. Pranav Bhoite, learned Advocate for the Applicant, Mrs. Anuja Gotad, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent and Ms. Saima Ansari, learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2. 2.

This Criminal Application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ("BNSS"), is filed by the Applicant (Accused No. 1) seeking modification of bail condition (d), imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati (hereinafter referred to as "Sessions Court"), through order dated 01.06.2022 on Exhibit-1 in Criminal Bail Application No. 609 of 2022. 3.

Applicant (Accused No. 1) alongwith four (4) others are accused in Crime No. 255 of 2022, registered with Daund Police

Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 r/w 34 of the IPC, under Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Section 7(1)(d) of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955.

4.

Vide order dated 01.06.2022 passed by the Sessions Court, in Criminal Bail Application No. 609 of 2022, the Applicant was released on bail, subject to the following conditions :- "1.

Application is allowed.

2.

In the event of arrest of the applicants/accused namely 1. Sadanand Appa Dhumal 2. Appa Laxman Dhumal

3. Vatsala Appa Dhumal all R/o-Daund and 4. Dayanand Appa Dhumal and 5. Sunita Dayanand Dhumal both R/o-Dist. Kolhapur, in Crime No.255/2022, registered with Daund Police Station, for the offences punishable U/Ss: 498-A, 323, 504, 506 R/w 34 of the IPC, U/s. 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) and 3(2) (va) of the S.C.S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and U/s. 7(1)(d) of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, they be released on bail on furnishing P.B. of Rs. 15,000/- each with surety in the likewise amount, to the satisfaction of the concerned investigation officer, and on the following terms and conditions :- (a) Accused No. 1 shall remain present in the concerned Police Station on 03.06.2022 from 11.00 am to 02.00 p.m. for interrogation by investigating Officer. (b) Accused Nos.

1 to 5 shall make themselves available for interrogation by police Officer as and when required under written intimation to her.

police officer.

(d) They shall not leave India without prior permission of this court.

(e) They shall not tamper the prosecution evidence. (f) They shall not threat to the prosecution witnesses. (g) They shall furnish their residential as well as business address along with contact numbers.

(h) They shall not indulge in any criminal activities. 3.

Inform the concerned police station accordingly. (emphasis supplied)"

5.

Mr. Pranav Bhoite, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that although the present Criminal Application initially sought broad reliefs in the prayers, on instructions from the Applicant, he now limits his request to prayer clause 11(b) in this Application and does not press prayer clause 11(a). Statement accepted. Prayer clause 11(b) reads as follows :- "b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to relax condition No. (d) of Order imposed upon the Applicant vide order dated 01.06.2022, passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge in Criminal Bail Application No. 609 of 2022 and permit the Applicant to travel abroad."

6.

Mr. Pranav Bhoite, learned Advocate for the Applicant, states that the Applicant is aggrieved by the sole condition no. 2(d) of the order dated 01.06.2022 passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 609 of 2022. He mentions that the Applicant is a doctor by profession and needs to travel abroad to attend conferences and

other work-related activities. He explains that such travels are unplanned and often involve last-minute requests or needs. He submits that bail condition no. 2 (d) causes significant inconvenience to the Applicant because, under this condition, the Applicant must seek prior permission to travel. He further submits that, owing to a heavy workload before the Session Court, such an application is not heard in time, creating difficulties for the Applicant in meeting his schedule. He states that, after the order dated 01.06.2022, the Applicant has travelled abroad on at least two occasions. He also asserts that the Applicant has neither violated any bail condition nor any travel condition. He states that the Applicant has family and roots in India.

He states that the Applicant has and will abide by all the other bail conditions of the order dated 01.06.2022 passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 609 of 2022. He submits that, instead of requiring prior permission for travel from the Court, the Applicant requests that the said condition be modified to allow him to provide his travel itinerary, including details of tickets, destination, and dates of his stay abroad, to the Investigating Officer prior to the travel. 7.

Mrs. Anuja Gotad, learned A.P.P. for the State/Respondent, states that the Applicant has not breached or violated any of the bail conditions. She states that the Applicant was granted permission to travel abroad on two occasions and has complied with the conditions. She, on instructions, states that bail condition no. 2(d) of the order dated 01.06.2022, passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 609 of 2022, can be relaxed if the Applicant provides an undertaking to share all travel details before the trip and inform the Investigation Officer of his return from abroad.

8.

Ms. Saima Ansari learned Advocate for Respondent No. 2, on instructions, states that if the Applicant provides his travel itinerary and all details related to his stay abroad to the Investigation Officer before his travel and informs the Investigation Officer of his return, then the request made by the Applicant in this Application can be considered.

9.

In view of the submissions of Mr. Pranav Bhoite, Mrs. Anuja Gotad, learned A.P.P., and Ms. Saima Ansari, and particularly since there are no allegations that the Applicant has violated any of the bail or travel conditions, the Applicant's request is considered. 10.

This Application is allowed in terms of the prayer clause 11(b). Consequently, bail condition no. 2(d) of the order dated 01.06.2022 passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 609 of 2022, stands deleted and replaced solely for the Applicant (Accused No. 1), with the following conditions :- (a) The Applicant shall notify the Investigating Officer in writing about his travel itinerary before travelling outside India. This includes his destination, duration of stay, hotel details, contact information abroad, and air tickets (to and from). After returning to India, he must inform the Investigating Officer at Daund Police Station, Pune, within 48 hours of his arrival. (b) All other bail conditions in the order dated 01.06.2022, passed in Criminal Bail Application No. 609 of 2022, remain unchanged and binding on the Applicant.

11.

Criminal Application No. 24 of 2026 is disposed of. [ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.] GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR GITALAXMI KRISHNA KOTAWADEKAR Date: 2026.03.23 15:12:27 +0530