Archive · 16 Sep 2026
Pune Influencer Santosh Pandit Granted Bail in Objectionable Reel Case
A court in Pune gave influencer Santosh Gajanan Pandit bail while his case continues.
The case concerns social-media videos that were allegedly offensive and sexually suggestive.
The videos reportedly mentioned Maharashtra minister Chandrakant Patil and a woman municipal corporator.
The prosecution opposed bail because it said Pandit might pressure witnesses or interfere with evidence.
Pandit’s lawyer said the words could have ordinary meanings and were not meant to insult women.
The judge said the question of his intention must be decided at trial.
Pandit must pay a ₹25,000 personal bond and provide a surety for the same amount.
He also cannot contact the complainant or tamper with evidence.
A Pune sessions court granted Santosh Gajanan Pandit regular bail in a case involving an allegedly objectionable social-media reel.
Pandit must provide a personal bond of ₹25,000 and a surety for the same amount.
The court barred him from contacting the informant or tampering with prosecution evidence.
The prosecution alleged that Pandit posted obscene and sexually suggestive remarks involving Chandrakant Patil, a woman PMC corporator and, previously, the Chief Minister.
The court said Pandit’s intent and whether the allegations are proved will be decided during the trial.
- Who
- Santosh Gajanan Pandit, the accused influencer; the complainant; and Maharashtra minister Chandrakant Patil were involved in the case.
- What
- A Pune sessions court granted Pandit regular bail in a case concerning an allegedly objectionable social-media reel and related videos.
- When
- The bail order was passed on Wednesday, September 16; Pandit had been sent to judicial custody on September 9.
- Where
- The case was registered at Kothrud Police Station, and the bail application was heard by a Pune sessions court.
- Why
- The court found that concerns about witness intimidation and evidence tampering were speculative enough not to justify continued detention, while leaving the question of intent for trial.
Defence Position
Prosecution and Complainant Position
Meaning and intent of the posts
Defence Position
Pandit’s lawyer argued that the words used were not intended to outrage women’s modesty and could have ordinary, non-sexual meanings.
Prosecution and Complainant Position
The complainant alleged that the videos contained obscene and sexually suggestive remarks intended to outrage women’s modesty.
Need for continued custody
Defence Position
The defence sought regular bail while the allegations remained unresolved and the court noted that intent would be examined at trial.
Prosecution and Complainant Position
The prosecution and complainant said the allegations were serious, investigation was pending, and further witness statements and evidence collection were needed.
Risk after release
Defence Position
The court found that concerns about witness intimidation, evidence tampering and repeated conduct were speculative and did not justify continued detention.
Prosecution and Complainant Position
The prosecution argued that Pandit might intimidate witnesses, tamper with evidence or repeat similar conduct if released.
- Accused
- Santosh Gajanan Pandit, 48
- Bail amount
- ₹25,000 personal bond and ₹25,000 surety
- Case location
- Kothrud Police Station, Pune
- Crime number
- Crime No. 361/2026
- Charges cited
- Sections 75(1)(iv), 75(3), 356(2) and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, plus Section 67 of the Information Technology Act
- Court conditions
- No contact with the informant and no tampering with prosecution evidence
- Maximum punishment noted
- Up to three years’ imprisonment for the alleged offences