Sakshi Lalaso Kamble v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 307 OF 2026 Sakshi Lalaso Kamble ...Applicant

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra And Ors.

...Respondents

----- Mr. Siddharth Shitole, for the Applicant.

Mr. Shrikant V. Gavand, APP, for the Respondent-State. -----

CORAM

: MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.

DATE : 10th JUNE, 2026.

by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date:

2026.06.12 19:10:10 +0530 SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM P.C.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent-State.

2.

The Applicant has approached this Court for seeking anticipatory bail application in connection with C.R. No.345 of 2026 registered with Satara City Police Station, Satara, for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

The case of the prosecution is that the informant Sanjay Mote lodged the report alleging that he was residing along with his wife Latika, son Sudarshan on given address. He was having daughter by name Bhagyashri. On 30.03.2026, the daughter left the house in

the morning at 8:30 for college however, not returned in the evening as per the routine. Therefore, the informant made inquiry about her whereabouts however, she could not be traced out. Thereafter, in the evening at about 7:00, he received photo snaps from which it was revealed that the daughter Bhagyashri had performed love marriage with the accused No.1 Rajkumar Kamble. On 03.04.2026, both i.e. the daughter and his husband had come to Mhaswad Police Station where the informant was called. When they reached, they met with Sonika Bansode, maternal sister of Rajkumar. She demanded dowry of Rs.5,00,000/- and gold ornaments of 5 tolas for cohabiting with the daughter. The informant and his family refused to give anything. Thereafter, on 12.04.2026, in between 9:00 to 10:00 p.m., the informant received phone call of Rajkumar who informed that Bhagyashri, was admitted in Civil Hospital Satara. Bhagyashri, died during the treatment.

4.

Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the Applicant is the real sister of the husband of the deceased (wife) and has been falsely implicated in the present crime, only with an intention to wreak vengeance against the entire family members from the husband of the deceased. It is submitted that the marriage between the deceased and her husband was performed after the victim had willingly eloped from her house. The allegations of the

demand on account of dowry is deliberately made with an intention to invoke stringent provisions and thereby deny bail to the present Applicant and other relatives. It is further submitted that the motherin-law of the Applicant was issued a notice under Section 35 of the BNSS. The other relatives i.e. Sonika Bansode against whom there are direct allegations of demand of Rs.5,00,000/- has already been released on anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Satara. The Applicant is a woman, has no criminal antecedents, and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, the Applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. 5.

As against the learned APP strongly opposes the anticipatory bail application on the ground that the Applicant is involved in serious offence of dowry death, which is punishable with life imprisonment. It is contended that there are direct allegations against the present Applicant and another co-accused Sonika Bansode regarding demand of dowry. Upon non fulfillment of such demand, the girl was found dead under suspicious circumstances, within 15 days of the marriage. The ingredients of Section 80 of the BNS are clearly made out as the girl was found to have died in unnatural circumstances, within 7 years of marriage and there are direct allegations of demand of dowry. The investigation is at a preliminary stage and as such the custodial interrogation of the Applicant is

necessary to complete the investigation. Hence, the application may be rejected.

6.

I have gone through the investigation papers which is culminated into filing of charge-sheet against the co-accused Sonika Bansode. A perusal of the post-mortem report does not show any injury marks upon the body. The inquest panchanama also does not show any suspicious circumstances about any injury sustained by the deceased. The postmortem report does not clarify as to the cause of death of the girl, however the viscera has been preserved and the final medical opinion is awaited.

7.

Be that as it may, the other co-accused i.e. mother of the husband of the deceased is served with a notice under Section 35 of the BNSS against whom also there are allegations of harassment on account of non fulfillment dowry. The other co-accused Sonika Bansode against whom there are direct allegations of demand of dowry of Rs.5,00,000/- has already been released on anticipatory bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Satara. The Applicant woman is not having any criminal antecedents and is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court. Since the investigation is almost completed, I do not find any impediment in protecting the Applicant in exercise power of under Section 482 of the BNSS hence, the following order :-

ORDER

I. in the event of arrest of the Applicant - Sakshi Lalaso Kamble, in connection with C.R. No.345 of 2026 registered with Satara City Police Station, Satara, for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, she be released on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount, on the following conditions :- A) The Applicant shall attend the concerned police station on every Monday and Tuesday between 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. till filing of the supplementary charge-sheet, if any against the present Applicant. B) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not influence the witnesses.

C) The Applicant shall submit her Adhar card and Pand Card copy to the Investigating Officer along with mobile numbers and addresses of two of her near relatives.

D) A single violation of the conditions would entitle the prosecution to seek cancellation of the bail.

II. The Application is allowed in the above terms and stands disposed of.

( MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.)