Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

HANMANT ALIAS HANMANTA CHANDAR JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Disposal
Dismissed as Withdrawn

Holding

The Court allowed the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application and disposed of it as withdrawn.

Summary

Hanmant Jadhav applied for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, alleging offences under several sections of the Bharratiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the POCSO Act, 2012, with a maximum punishment of seven years. He argued, relying on Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, that a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS was required but had not been issued. The State indicated that the investigating officer intended to issue such a notice. Consequently, the applicant sought to withdraw his bail application, stating that his apprehension was allayed. The Court granted leave to withdraw the application and disposed of the anticipatory bail petition as withdrawn.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in the present case.
  • Whether a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS is mandatory before granting anticipatory bail.
  • Whether the applicant may withdraw the anticipatory bail application at this stage.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 482
  • Section 35(3)
  • notice requirement
  • withdrawal of application
  • criminal procedure
  • BNSS
  • BNS
  • POCSO

Judgment

                                                               1
                                                                                  905-ABA-477-2026(CR).DOC


                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                               CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

                                             CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                 CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 477 OF 2026


                          Hanmant Alias Hanmanta Chandar Jadhav                      ….Applicant
                                VERSUS
                          The State Of Maharashtra and Ors.                          ....Respondents

                          _________________________________________________________________


                          Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde i/b Mr. Rajpurohit Darshan Singh, for the Applicant.
                          Ms. Shubhangi N. Deshmukh, APP, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 - State.
                          PSI, Ranvare, Akkalkot North Police Station, present.
                          _________________________________________________________________



                                              CORAM      :   ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.
          Digitally
          signed by
          SHANTANU
SHANTANU SHANKARSA
SHANKARSA DHUDUM
                                              DATE       :   25th AUGUST, 2026.
DHUDUM    Date:
          2026.08.25
          15:47:24
          +0530
                          P.C.


                          1.          Heard Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde, learned Advocate for the Applicant

                          and Ms. Shubhangi N. Deshmukh, learned APP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2

                          – State.


                          2.          By this application filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya

                          Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), the Applicant is

                          seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No.568 of 2025 registered

                          with Akkalkot North Police Station, for the offences punishable under

                          Sections 74, 76, 118(1), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 189(2), 191(2) and 190 of

                          the Bharratiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS” and Sections 8 and

                 Shantanu S. Dhudum
                                               2
                                                               905-ABA-477-2026(CR).DOC


         12 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short,

         “POCSO Act”).


         3.              Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde, learned Advocate for the Applicant

         submits that the maximum punishment prescribed for the offences charged

         in Crime No.568 of 2025 is seven years. He relying on the decision of the

         Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central

         Bureau of Investigation1, submits that issuance of notice under Section

         35(3) of the BNSS to the Applicant is necessary. He submits that no such

         notice was issued by the Investigating Officer.


         4.            Ms. Shubhangi N. Deshmukh, learned APP for Respondent Nos.1

         and 2 – State, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, states that as

         the maximum punishment prescribed for the offence charged in Crime

         No.568 of 2025 is seven years, the Investigating Officer intends to issue a

         notice to the Applicant under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023.


         5.            In view of the statement made by Ms. Shubhangi N. Deshmukh,

         learned APP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 – State, Mr. Ritesh M. Thobde,

         learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that, at this stage, the

         apprehension of the Applicant stands allayed. He, therefore, seeks leave to

         withdraw this Application, as the Investigating Officer intends to follow the

         procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023 and




         1 (2024) 9 SCC 177.

Shantanu S. Dhudum
                                              3
                                                             905-ABA-477-2026(CR).DOC


         the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender

         Kumar Antil (supra).


         6.          Ms. Shubhangi N. Deshmukh, learned APP for Respondent Nos.1

         and 2 – State, submits that the Investigating Officer shall abide by the

         statement made before this Court.


         7.          In view of the above, leave is granted to withdraw the

         application.


         8.          Anticipatory Bail Application No.477 of 2026 is disposed of as

         withdrawn.




                                                    ( ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)




Shantanu S. Dhudum


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.