Sanjay Rajender Sharma vs The State of Maharashtra — 185/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482. Disposed: Contested--BAIL GRANTED on 12th March 2026.

Cri.Bail Appln. - Bail Application

CNR: MHRG170003852026

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

04-03-2026

Filing Number

295/2026

Filing Date

04-03-2026

Registration No

185/2026

Registration Date

04-03-2026

Court

District and Addl. Sessions Judge, Panvel, Dist., Raigad

Judge

4-District Judge - 3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel

Decision Date

12th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--BAIL GRANTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

48

Police Station

Panvel Taluka Police Station

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 64(2)(M),69,351(2)

Petitioner(s)

Sanjay Rajender Sharma

Adv. Ankit Bangera

Respondent(s)

The State of Maharashtra

Hearing History

Judge: 4-District Judge - 3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel

12-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

Order

07-03-2026

Order

05-03-2026

Reply/Say

04-03-2026

Order on Exh

Final Orders / Judgements

12-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

The Special Judge at Panvel granted anticipatory bail to Sanjay Rajender Sharma in a case involving alleged sexual misconduct and false promise of marriage. The court found that since both the applicant and victim were married, aware of each other's marital status, and consenting adults who cohabitated for considerable time, the charge of false promise of marriage was weak; physical custody was not required for investigation purposes. The applicant was released on bail with conditions including Rs. 30,000 bond, cooperation with investigation, and restrictions on contacting the victim or leaving India. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

The Special Judge at Panvel granted anticipatory bail to Sanjay Rajender Sharma in a case involving alleged sexual misconduct and false promise of marriage. The court found that since both the applicant and victim were married, aware of each other's marital status, and consenting adults who cohabitated for considerable time, the charge of false promise of marriage was weak; physical custody was not required for investigation purposes. The applicant was released on bail with conditions including Rs. 30,000 bond, cooperation with investigation, and restrictions on contacting the victim or leaving India. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

District and Addl. Sessions Judge, Panvel, Dist., Raigad All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case