← Library
Bombay High CourtIA/3702/2025disposed off

Pramod Vijay Jadhav v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2026-02-16Hon'Ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. Joshi2 pages

2-3-ia-3702-3704-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

(02) INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3702 OF 2025 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.3272 OF 2025 Pramod Vijay Jadhav .....Applicant In the Matter in Between:

Pramod Vijay Jadhav .....Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

.....Respondents WITH

(03) INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3704 OF 2025 IN BAIL APPLICATION NO.3271 OF 2025 Shivraj Raosaheb Jadhav .....Applicant In the Matter in Between:

Shivraj Raosaheb Jadhav .....Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra & Anr.

.....Respondents Mr. Siddharth Shitole, for the Applicant in both Applications. Mr. Chandrakant D. Mali, APP, for the Respondent-State in IA/3702/2025.

Mr. Pankaj P. Deokar, APP, for the Respondent-State in IA/3704/2025. Mr. Vaibhav Bajarang Koli, PC/2322, Vita Police Station is present in both the matters.

CORAM : MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.

DATED : 16th FEBRUARY 2026 P.C.:- 1.

The Applicants have filed these applications for relaxation of Gaikwad RD 1/2

2-3-ia-3702-3704-2025.doc condition which was imposed while granting bail not to enter in the village Alsand, where the victim stays till the recording of evidence of victim. The Counsel for Applicant in Interim Application No.3702 of 2025 has stated that the Applicant is having garage in said village. Since last six months, he is away from his business. For the business purpose, he requested to relax the condition not to enter the village. Whereas the Applicant in Interim Application No.3704 of 2025 is pursuing his education in Vita.

2.

The learned APP opposed the applications and has stated that the allegations are about stalking and taking photographs of victim without her knowledge and forwarding those photographs on Instagram and snap chat. The allegations are against both these Applicants.

3.

As the condition is imposed till recording of evidence of victim, considering the allegations made against the Applicants in both the application, this is not a fit case to relax the condition. 4.

Hence, both the Applications are rejected.

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) Digitally signed by RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date:

2026.02.17 18:52:07 +0530 Gaikwad RD 2/2 RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD