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- Dismissed as Withdrawn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The Court allowed the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application and disposed of it as withdrawn.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 The Court granted leave to withdraw the application and disposed of the anticipatory bail petition as withdrawn.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
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 35(3), 482
- Bharratiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(1), 189(2), 190, 191(2), 351(2), 352, 74, 76
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 12, 8
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
Checking your session…