GANESH SITARAM KANADE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — BA/600/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 483. Disposed: Contested--APPLICATION ALLOWED on 06th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM030124862026
Filing Number
BA/3144/2026
Filing Date
27-Mar-2026
Registration No
BA/600/2026
Registration Date
27-Mar-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. Brahme
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. Brahme
Bench Type
Single
Judicial Branch
Criminal
Decision Date
06-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--APPLICATION ALLOWED
Last updated 14-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GANESH SITARAM KANADE
Adv. Sonawane Sunita G.
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Adv. P.P. FOR R/SOLE 1123
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. BrahmeView PDF
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) granted bail to Ganesh Sitaram Kanade, a hotel proprietor arrested for offences under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and BNS 2023, following a police raid discovering prostitution activities at his premises. Despite acknowledging his five prior similar offences and rejecting his claim of ignorance, the court held that prior criminal history alone cannot deny bail and imposed stringent conditions including a ₹70,000 bond, residential restrictions, and prohibition from illegal activities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-May-2026
—
Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. Brahme
-
21-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. BrahmeView PDF
-
21-Apr-2026
—
Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. Brahme
-
02-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Shailesh P. BrahmeView PDF
-
02-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
27-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. BA/600/2026
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) granted bail to Ganesh Sitaram Kanade, a hotel proprietor arrested for offences under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and BNS 2023, following a police raid discovering prostitution activities at his premises. Despite acknowledging his five prior similar offences and rejecting his claim of ignorance, the court held that prior criminal history alone cannot deny bail and imposed stringent conditions including a ₹70,000 bond, residential restrictions, and prohibition from illegal activities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts