Bombay High Court

SITARAM RABHAJI WANVEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Disposal: APPLICATION ALLOWED

Holding

The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, confirming the interim relief dated 23.10.2024 except Clause No. (ii).

Summary

The applicant, Sitaram Rabhaji Wanve, filed an anticipatory bail application (No. 1821 of 2024) after a charge sheet was filed against him. The trial court had already granted regular bail to the applicant upon his appearance. The State of Maharashtra opposed the anticipatory bail but did not contest the fact that regular bail had been granted. The learned counsel for the applicant sought confirmation of the interim relief previously ordered on 23 October 2024. The Court found no justification to deny the interim relief and therefore allowed the anticipatory bail application, confirming the interim relief except for Clause No. (ii). The order was pronounced by Justice R. M. Joshi on 11 August 2026.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when regular bail has already been granted
Whether the interim relief dated 23.10.2024 should be confirmed in whole or in part

Subjects

anticipatory bail
regular bail
interim relief
criminal procedure
bail

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:35011




                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1821 OF 2024

                                      Sitaram Rabhaji Wanve
                                              VERSUS
                                      The State Of Maharashtra

           Mr. K. N. Shermale, Advocate for applicant
           Mr. A. R. Kale, APP for respondent-State

                                                  CORAM      : R. M. JOSHI, J.
                                                  DATE       : 11th AUGUST, 2026

           PER COURT :-

           1.             Learned Counsel for the applicant makes a statement that

           after filing of charge sheet, regular bail has been granted to the applicant

           on his appearance before the trial Court.


           2.             Learned APP opposed the application however he does not

           dispute aforestated fact.


           3.             In view of the above, there is no justification not to confirm

           interim relief.


           4.             Application stands   allowed by confirming interim       relief

           granted by order dated 23.10.2024 except Clause No. (ii).




                                                                   (R. M. JOSHI, J.)

           B. S. Joshi




           937-ABA-1821-2024.odt                                                   1 of 1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…