Bombay High Court
SADDAM PAIGAMBER CHAMNOORversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court permitted the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application and allowed the applicant to file a fresh application with full details, without deciding the merits.
Summary
Saddam Paigamber Chamnoor applied for anticipatory bail, but the State of Maharashtra pointed out that the application failed to disclose details of six alleged offences. The applicant’s counsel sought to withdraw the application and file a fresh one with complete particulars, while also agreeing to make the first informant a party to the new filing. The court allowed the withdrawal and granted liberty to file a fresh anticipatory bail application, expressly stating that it had not examined the merits of the case. No substantive merits were decided, and all issues on merits remain open for the fresh application.
Issues considered
- Whether an anticipatory bail application lacking details of the offences can be withdrawn and a fresh application filed.
- Whether the first informant must be made a party to an anticipatory bail application.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- withdrawal
- procedural compliance
- first informant
- criminal procedure
Judgment
35.ABA-2412.26.DOC
Digitally signed
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
by PRACHI
PRACHI PRANESH
PRANESH
NANDIWADEKAR
NANDIWADEKAR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Date: 2026.09.01
16:19:20 +0530
ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2412 OF 2026
Saddam Paigamber Chamnoor … Applicant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra …. Respondent
______________________
Mr. Navid Mulani (through VC) a/w Mr. Mridul Das, for the
Applicant.
Mr. S. V. Walve, APP, for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Vikas Shivarkar for the First Informant/Intervenor.
Mr. S. D. Bendra, Police Inspector attached to Bibwewadi Police
Station, Pune City present.
______________________
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATED : 31 AUGUST 2026
P. C. :-
1. At the outset, Mr. Walve learned APP for the Respondent-
State states that although it is mentioned that there are total 6
crimes registered against the present applicant in paragraph no.11,
however, no details whatsoever are set out.
2. In view of the said contention raised by learned APP, Mr.
Page 1
PPN
35.ABA-2412.26.DOC
Mulani learned counsel appearing for the applicant seeks
withdrawal of the present application with liberty to file a fresh
application by giving the details of all the antecedents.
3. Mr. Vikas Shivarkar, learned counsel appears for the first
informant and states that the First Informant has not been made
party to the present anticipatory bail application, Mr. Mulani,
learned APP states the first informant will be made party to the
fresh anticipatory bail application.
4. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is allowed to be
withdrawn and disposed of with liberty to file fresh Anticipatory
Bail Application as aforesaid.
5. It is clarified that this Court has not considered merits and
all contentions on merits are expressly kept open.
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
Page 2
PPN
Checking your session…