MOHD WASIM MOHD ASGAR ANSARI vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — ABA/559/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 09th April 2026.
CNR: HCBM010105642026
Filing Number
ABA/4520/2026
Filing Date
27-Feb-2026
Registration No
ABA/559/2026
Registration Date
27-Feb-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice R. N. Laddha
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice R. N. Laddha
Bench Type
Single
Category
BAIL ( 51 )
Sub-Category
Anticipatory ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Criminal
Decision Date
09-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Allowed
Last updated 09-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MOHD WASIM MOHD ASGAR ANSARI
Adv. Anup Lahoti
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
09-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice R. N. LaddhaView PDF
Summary The Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail to Mohd. Wasim Mohd Asgar Ansari in a sexual assault case involving charges under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita sections 74, 75, 79, and 351(2). The Court found the one-month delay in filing the FIR (January 5-12 incidents, FIR on February 5), coupled with ongoing property disputes and counter-complaints between parties, raised credibility concerns. Though the prosecution expressed apprehension about evidence tampering and witness intimidation, the Court deemed these risks manageable through bail conditions: Rs. 25,000 PR Bond, no contact with the victim, no entry into police station jurisdiction, and no witness interference until charge sheet filing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
02-Apr-2026
Fresh Admission (Anticipatory Bail Applications)
Hon'ble Shri Justice N. R. Borkar
-
05-Mar-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice N. R. BorkarView PDF
-
05-Mar-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Feb-2026
Case filed
Registration No. ABA/559/2026
Summary The Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail to Mohd. Wasim Mohd Asgar Ansari in a sexual assault case involving charges under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita sections 74, 75, 79, and 351(2). The Court found the one-month delay in filing the FIR (January 5-12 incidents, FIR on February 5), coupled with ongoing property disputes and counter-complaints between parties, raised credibility concerns. Though the prosecution expressed apprehension about evidence tampering and witness intimidation, the Court deemed these risks manageable through bail conditions: Rs. 25,000 PR Bond, no contact with the victim, no entry into police station jurisdiction, and no witness interference until charge sheet filing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts