Bombay High Court
SAGAR RAJENDRA BIRE AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed To be withdrawn
Holding
The Court allowed the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application and disposed of it without considering its merits.
Summary
The applicants, Sagar Rajendra Bire and another, filed an anticipatory bail application before the Bombay High Court. The State of Maharashtra, through its learned assistant public prosecutor, pointed out that the application failed to disclose certain antecedent offences, namely cases 6051/2014, 04/2016 and 106/2017, each invoking Section 65 of different statutes. The applicants' counsel sought to withdraw the application and requested liberty to file a fresh one with full disclosure. The Court, after hearing both sides, permitted the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application and ordered its disposal, expressly stating that it had not examined the merits of the bail claim. No substantive decision on the bail issue was rendered.
Issues considered
- Whether an anticipatory bail application can be entertained when the applicant fails to disclose antecedent offences under the cited statutes
- Whether the Court may order the withdrawal of an anticipatory bail application on such a ground
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- withdrawal of application
- non-disclosure of antecedents
- criminal procedure
Judgment
906-ABA-2247-2026.doc
Rohit Ghuge
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2247 OF 2026
Sagar Rajendra Bire and Anr. ...Applicants
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Sachin Deokar, for Applicants.
Ms. S. M. Yadav, APP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Kshama Vitthal Bhambre, Warje Malwadi Police Station, Pune City.
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 11 AUGUST 2026
P.C. :
1. Heard Mr. Deokar, learned counsel appearing for Applicants and
Ms. Yadav, learned APP, for Respondent-State.
2. At the outset, Ms. Yadav, learned APP for Respondent-State states
that following antecedents are not disclosed in the Anticipatory Bail
Application:
1. 6051/2014 मुंबई दारुबंदी कलम ६५ (ई )
2. 04/2016 राज्य उत्पादन शु ल्क - मुं बई दारुबं दी कलम ६५ (ड)
3. 106/2017 महाराष्ट् र प्रोव्हि हबीशन ऍक्ट कलम ६५ (ख )
3. In view of the said contentions raised by learned APP, Mr. Deokar,
learned counsel appearing for the Applicant seeks withdrawal of the
Anticipatory Bail Application with liberty to file a fresh application by
disclosing details of all the antecedents.
Page 1 of 2
906-ABA-2247-2026.doc
Rohit Ghuge
4. Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed to be
withdrawn and disposed of as such with the liberty as sought.
5. It is clarified that this court has not considered the merits.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…