Bombay High Court

AMIT KUMAR BHATIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided: 16 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court allowed the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application with leave to file a fresh application.

Summary

Arjun Vitthal Kudhekar applied for anticipatory bail, but the State of Maharashtra pointed out that the application disclosed only one criminal antecedent while omitting another. The State’s learned assistant public prosecutor, Ms. S. M. Yadav, raised this omission as a ground for objection. The applicant’s counsel, Mr. Akshay Deshmukh, sought permission to withdraw the existing anticipatory bail application and file a fresh one with full details of all antecedents. The Court, after considering the procedural aspect, allowed the withdrawal with leave to re‑file, expressly stating that it had not examined the merits of the bail claim. All substantive issues remain open for consideration in any subsequent application.

Issues considered

Whether an anticipatory bail application can be withdrawn and re‑filed when the applicant fails to disclose all criminal antecedents
Whether the omission of a criminal antecedent warrants denial of anticipatory bail

Subjects

anticipatory bail
criminal antecedents
withdrawal of application
procedural law
bail procedure

Judgment

                                                                      27-ABA-2530-2026.DOC




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                              ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2530 OF 2026
ARJUN
VITTHAL               Amit Kumar Bhati                                   …Applicant
KUDHEKAR
                            Versus
Digitally signed by
ARJUN VITTHAL
KUDHEKAR
                      The State of Maharashtra                           …Respondent
Date: 2026.09.17
12:47:18 +0530


                      Mr. Akshay Deshmukh a/w Sumit Chaudhary, Taufiq Qazi & Sonali
                      Patil, for the Applicant.
                      Ms. S. M. Yadav, APP, for the Respondent-State.
                      PI Pathan, Unit-7, Crime, Pune, present.


                                            CORAM:      MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
                                            DATED:      16 SEPTEMBER 2026
                      PC:-


                      1.      At the outset, Ms. Yadav, learned APP, for the Respondent-

                      State of Maharashtra, states that although one criminal antecedent

                      has been mentioned in the Anticipatory Bail Application, another

                      criminal antecedent has not been mentioned.


                      2.      In view of the said contention raised by Ms. Yadav, learned

                      APP, Mr. Deshmukh, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant,

                      seeks withdrawal of the Anticipatory Bail Application with leave to

                      file a fresh Anticipatory Bail Application by giving all the

                      particulars of the criminal antecedents.




                                                      Page 1
                      Arjun
                                                  27-ABA-2530-2026.DOC




3.      Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application is allowed to

be withdrawn with leave as sought.


4.      It is clarified that this Court has not considered the merits

and all contentions on merits are expressly kept open.




                                           [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]




                                Page 2
Arjun

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.