Nagpur court grants anticipatory bail to Sunil Meshram in case over conduct towards NIT women officials
Sunil Meshram, accused of misbehaving with three women officials of the NIT, must report to the investigating agency every Tuesday between 1 pm and 4 pm.
The Nagpur District and Sessions Court-3 has granted anticipatory bail to social activist Sunil Meshram. Meshram is accused of allegedly misbehaving with three women officials of the NIT and obstructing government work. Judge R.M. Mishra directed him to cooperate with the investigation and to appear before the investigating agency every Tuesday between 1 pm and 4 pm.
The case began with a complaint by a woman NIT official, lodged at Sadar police station. The complaint alleges that on August 21, 2026, Meshram went to the NIT office with Neeraj Dahiwale, a property broker known to him. There, a woman official was questioned about the RL details of a plot. The official said she was not connected with the matter.
According to the complaint, the two accused then went behind the chair of another woman official. Meshram is alleged to have placed his hand on the chair. When the official asked him to move away, he allegedly put his hand on her shoulder and made a remark about her looking beautiful. The complaint says the accused's behaviour caused discomfort to the women officials and also obstructed their official work.
On these allegations, Sadar police registered crime number 430/2026 under Sections 74, 75(2), 79, 221 and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Advocates Kamal Satuja, Kailash Dodani and Amol Lingayat argued for Meshram. The defence called the allegations false. It said the alleged incident took place on August 21 but the complaint was filed on August 25, a delay of four days, which the advocates said raised questions about the complaint's credibility.
The defence also said Meshram had earlier filed separate complaints against the woman official concerned and against NIT executive engineer Anil Rathod. These were made to the NIT chairman, the police commissioner, the DCP and the guardian minister. They allegedly stated that large sums were being taken from ordinary citizens for issuing RLs of plots. According to the advocates, these complaints predate the present FIR, so the case is action taken in retaliation for them.
The defence also cited CCTV footage. It said the footage for the day of the alleged incident shows no record of Neeraj Dahiwale entering the NIT premises. It argued that this raised questions about the allegations and that Meshram had been falsely implicated. The advocates further said the sections invoked do not prima facie apply to the allegations, and cited several Bombay High Court and Supreme Court rulings. They said Meshram had already cooperated with the investigation, so custodial interrogation was not needed.
Advocate Sumit Bodhalkar, for the woman official, and Assistant Public Prosecutor Varsha Aglawe, for the state, opposed the anticipatory bail plea. They said the allegations were serious and the investigation was at an early stage. They argued that if released on bail, the accused could tamper with evidence or influence witnesses, and sought rejection of the application on that ground.
After hearing both sides, District and Sessions Judge-3 R.M. Mishra granted Meshram anticipatory bail. The court imposed the condition that he appear before the investigating agency every Tuesday from 1 pm to 4 pm and cooperate with the investigation.
