Sign in

Court grants pre-arrest bail to two accused in RTI-related case

Pune sessions court grants anticipatory bail to two men accused of obstructing public servants, threatening officials and circulating videos recorded inside the Paud tehsildar’s office

Published on: Oct 16, 2026, 07:49:10 IST
By
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
Copy link
  • copy link

Pune: A Pune sessions court has granted anticipatory bail to two men accused of obstructing public servants, threatening officials and circulating videos recorded inside the Paud tehsildar’s office during a confrontation over delays in providing information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

Pune sessions court grants anticipatory bail to two men accused of obstructing public servants, threatening officials and circulating videos recorded inside the Paud tehsildar’s office. ((PIC FOR REPRESENTATION))
Pune sessions court grants anticipatory bail to two men accused of obstructing public servants, threatening officials and circulating videos recorded inside the Paud tehsildar’s office. ((PIC FOR REPRESENTATION))

Additional sessions judge HM Bhosale passed the order on October 12, allowing the applications filed by Pratik Jitendra Waghmare, 29, a student from Khed, and Vishal alias Saki Sanjay Gaikwad, 39, a businessman from Wakad.

According to the prosecution, the accused visited the office on August 12 and 21, 2026, alleging delays in providing RTI information. They allegedly snatched documents from public servant Pradip Sontakke, entered nayab tehsildar Madan Jagdand’s cabin, recorded videos and threatened officials. The videos were later circulated on social media, police alleged.

The accused argued that they had approached officials to seek information about alleged illegal excavation by builders and had committed no offence. The prosecution opposed bail, citing an externment order against Gaikwad and concerns about witness intimidation.

After examining the videos in open court, the judge observed that the footage showed the accused seeking information and questioning officials about delays in providing it.

“There is not a single act which can be construed as obstruction to the public servant while discharging the public duty,” the judge observed, adding that the footage instead indicated delays by officials.

The court held that custodial interrogation was not warranted and granted both men anticipatory bail. Each must execute a personal bond of ₹30,000 with one surety for the same amount.

They were directed to cooperate with the investigation and refrain from threatening or influencing witnesses. Any breach of the conditions could lead to cancellation of bail.