Bombay High Court
BAYAJI DHULA JANKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The anticipatory bail application was dismissed for non‑prosecution due to the applicant's failure to appear.
Summary
Bayaji Dhula Jankar filed an anticipatory bail application (Cr. No. 2202 of 2023) before the Bombay High Court. The applicant and his counsel failed to appear at multiple listed times, including the hearing on 30 September 2026. The Respondent State, through counsel N.B. Patil, argued that the absence indicated lack of interest and non‑compliance with a prior order dated 8 August 2025. The Court, noting the applicant’s continued non‑appearance, accepted the respondent’s request and dismissed the anticipatory bail application for non‑prosecution. No substantive merits of the bail claim were examined.
Issues considered
- Can an anticipatory bail application be dismissed solely on the ground of the applicant's non‑appearance and failure to comply with court orders?
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- non‑appearance
- dismissal
- criminal procedure
- section 438
Judgment
901-ABA-2202-2023 (CR).docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 2202 OF 2023
Bayaji Dhula Jankar …...Applicant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra …...Respondent
——————
None for Applicant.
Mr. N.B. Patil, A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.
——————
Coram : ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
Date : 30th September 2026.
PER COURT :
1. This Application is listed today in view of the order dated 28 th
September 2026. This application was called out at 10:45 a.m., 12:15 p.m.,
4:30 p.m. and before the rising of the Court at 7:15 p.m. Neither the
Applicant nor the Advocate for the Applicant was present in Court either
physically or through V.C. mode at the aforesaid timings when the matter was
called out. Mr. Patil, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State, was present as
and when the matter was called out today.
2. On 28th September 2026, the following order was passed :
“1. This matter is of the year 2023.
2. When this Application was called out, neither the Applicant nor the
osk 1 of 2
901-ABA-2202-2023 (CR).docx
Advocate for the Applicant were present in Court either physically
or through VC mode
3. In view of the absence of the Advocate for the Applicant, as a matter
of indulgence, list this matter on 30.09.2026, under the caption "For
Disposal".
4. It is clarified that if the Advocate for the Applicant chooses not to
appear, this Application would be disposed of after hearing the
parties present.”
3. Mr. Patil, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State, submits that the
absence of the Advocate for the Applicant and for that matter the Applicant,
is an indication that the Applicant is not interested in pursuing this
Application. He submits that the absence appears to be in view of the
observations made by this Court in paragraph Nos. 2 and 3 of the order dated
8th August 2025. He further submits that the Applicant has not complied with
the said order.
4. Mr. Patil, learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State, therefore insists on
dismissal of this Application.
5. In view of the absence of the Advocate for the Applicant, this Court is
left with no other alternative but to accept the request made by Mr. Patil,
learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State.
6. The Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2202 of 2023 is
therefore dismissed for non-prosecution.
Digitally signed
by OMKAR
SHIVAHAR
OMKAR KUMBHAKARN
SHIVAHAR
KUMBHAKARN Date:
2026.09.30
20:39:07
[ ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J. ]
+0530
osk 2 of 2
Checking your session…